netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V2 0/3] in order support for vhost-net

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250718052747-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 05:29:03 -0400
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	eperezma@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jonah.palmer@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 0/3] in order support for vhost-net

On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 11:19:26AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On 7/18/25 4:04 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 9:52 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> >> On 7/17/25 8:01 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 1:55 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 10:03:00AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 8:04 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 16:47:52 +0800 Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>>>>> This series implements VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER support for vhost-net. This
> >>>>>>> feature is designed to improve the performance of the virtio ring by
> >>>>>>> optimizing descriptor processing.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Benchmarks show a notable improvement. Please see patch 3 for details.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You tagged these as net-next but just to be clear -- these don't apply
> >>>>>> for us in the current form.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Will rebase and send a new version.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> Indeed these look as if they are for my tree (so I put them in
> >>>> linux-next, without noticing the tag).
> >>>
> >>> I think that's also fine.
> >>>
> >>> Do you prefer all vhost/vhost-net patches to go via your tree in the future?
> >>>
> >>> (Note that the reason for the conflict is because net-next gets UDP
> >>> GSO feature merged).
> >>
> >> FTR, I thought that such patches should have been pulled into the vhost
> >> tree, too. Did I miss something?
> > 
> > See: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg1108896.html
> 
> I'm sorry I likely was not clear in my previous message. My question is:
> any special reason to not pull the UDP tunnel GSO series into the vhost
> tree, too?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo

Paolo I'm likely confused. That series is in net-next, right?
So now it would be work to drop it from there, and invalidate
all the testing it got there, for little benefit -
the merge conflict is easy to resolve.

-- 
MST