Hi Or,
Le 17.10.2013 11:19, Or Gerlitz a écrit :
On 16/10/2013 03:04, Roland Dreier wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Or Gerlitz <[email protected]>
wrote:
Roland, after applying a small fix which was sent to you by Matan on
Sep 22nd + another tiny fix by Yann to Matan's patch (the two can be
surely squashed into one small patch), things are working OK. Yann is
suggesting to enhance them to work and look even better and for some
reasons (life) he didn't get to do that on the 3-4 months the patches
spent on the list and went through review of Sean/Jason/Shawn and you
(RD). I don't see how/why you use the term half-baked here.
Unless I'm misunderstanding, Yann's suggestion for enhancement is not
user/kernel ABI compatible with what is in the tree now. Given that
we should really try to find an ABI that lasts for a long time, and
that we already have a proposal to improve things, shouldn't we hold
off on freezing the new ABI for one more kernel cycle?
Roland, Yann, the uverbs extensions + flow-steering patches spent
many months on the list, once the review started
we did quick fixes for all the comments and made it for 3.12-rc1 which
was delay or two kernel cycles vs. what
could happen if the feedback was on time (*).
"On time" is a matter of schedule, and since we don't (all) work
for the same employer, we don't have exact matching priorities.
But more than an agenda, we share the principles of code quality,
maintainability, coherency, usability.
My purpose was not to delay the wide availability of the flow steering
feature. I'm just lazily maintaining a "bound checking" patchset that
got
"hit" by the flow steering functions when they entered in -next.
I was not very impressed by the new interface and provided some late
feedback.
Since then, I have more time (spare time between real work and kids) and
focus more on the patches submitted on the list.
But as spare time (kernel) developer, I'm not able to provide as much
valuable contributions as full time kernel developer.
Indeed since we do want to have ABI that lasts for long, deferring the
uverbs support for extensions to 3.13 along with
flow-steering support to user space is something we can live with,
conditioned on commitment of Yann to quickly submit
his fixed patches that addresses the issues Matan raised and of you
(RD) to pick them once Yann and Matan agree
its done into for-next so they are safe for 3.13
I can only agree to provide fixed patches for 3.13.
If I could find time and inspiration, I will try to provide
a novel scheme for command expansion that could fulfill the
what was expressed by Matan. But perhaps someone would come with
a better idea.
Just to double check, by no means we are talking on reverting the
whole series, flow-steering will be in
3.12 in the IB core and mlx4_ib
I believe it will disable by #if 0 / #endif.
It could be protected by #ifdef
CONFIG_INFINIBAND_EXPERIMENTAL_UVERBS_FLOW_STEERING
instead, but I don't know if it's acceptable practice for such piece of
code
that should be exposed in its current state.
Regards.
--
Yann Droneaud
OPTEYA
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
