Hi Jakub, On 8/19/25 20:05, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 16:54:23 +0530 Meghana Malladi wrote:@@ -1332,6 +1350,13 @@ static int prueth_xsk_wakeup(struct net_device *ndev, u32 qid, u32 flags) } }+ if (flags & XDP_WAKEUP_RX) {+ if (!napi_if_scheduled_mark_missed(&emac->napi_rx)) { + if (likely(napi_schedule_prep(&emac->napi_rx))) + __napi_schedule(&emac->napi_rx); + } + } + return 0;I suspect this series is generated against old source or there's another conflicting series in flight, because git ends up applying this chunk to prueth_xsk_pool_disable() :S
That's interesting. I have directly applied these patches locally on the tip of net-next (62a2b3502573 "net: openvswitch: Use for_each_cpu() where appropriate") And everything gets applied cleanly and I couldn't reproduce the issue you mentioned above. Can you tell me on top of which commit you tried applying this series ? Or I wonder if this happened because I posted this series from my net tree instead of net-next. Does it make sense to re-post the same patches from net-next tree ?
Before you proceed with AF_XDP could you make this driver build under COMPILE_TEST on x86? This is very easy to miss, luckily we got an off list report but its pure luck. And obviously much more effort for the maintainers to investigate than if it was caught by the CI.
I have tried what you have suggested and these are the logs for the same: https://gist.github.com/MeghanaMalladiTI/8a3f64773d96e58aec48aca78c1bc98c
ICSSG driver as a module has been compiled without any errors but encountered few linking errors due to some missing symbols from another module (CONFIG_TI_K3_UDMA). I included this module in the next iteration and tried compiling but facing some build failures, logs: https://gist.github.com/MeghanaMalladiTI/f7ed3958b5ab2b2be479151254015ff0
I think it is safe to assume ICSSG as a driver build on x86 doesn't have build regressions, thoughts ? Also is this something which needs to be done by us everytime we are posting some feature upstream or does Kernel CI take care of it ?
