On 06/05/2017 05:53 PM, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Jes Sorensen <jsoren...@fb.com> wrote:
On 06/03/2017 03:37 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Jes Sorensen <jsoren...@fb.com> wrote:
On 05/28/2017 02:03 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Jes Sorensen <jes.soren...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 05/27/2017 05:02 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Jes Sorensen
<jes.soren...@gmail.com>
wrote:
This gets rid of the temporary #ifdef spaghetti and allows the code
to
compile without offload support enabled.
I am pretty sure we can do that exercise you're up to without any
spaghetti cooking and even put more code under that CONFIG directive
(en_rep.c), I'll take that with Saeed.
I want to avoid adding #ifdef CONFIG_foo to the main code in order to
keep
it readable. I did it gradually to make sure I didn't break anything
and
to
allow for it to be bisected in case something did break. If we can move
out
more code from places like en_rep.c into eswitch_offload.c and get it
disabled that way that would be great, but I like to limit the number
of
#ifdefs we add to the actual code.
FWIW (see below), squashing your seven patches to one resulted in a
fairly simple/clear
patch, so if we go that way, no need to have seven commits just for this
piece.
Squashing patches into jumbo patches is inherently broken and bad coding
practice! It makes it way more complicated to debug and bisect in case a
minor detail broke in the process.
Not that pure LOC ##-s is the only/deep measurement, but your overall
changes in the the seven patch series account to:
5 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
and by no mean this is jumbo or inherently broken and bad coded, so
please slow down please, I looked with care on the resulted patch and
said it's basically ok.
Squashing patches for the sake of squashing patches is inherently broken and
bad. So please calm down and stop this mangling of other peoples' patches.
If you want an alternative, put up a proposal and look at it for comparison
somewhere.
Hey Jes,
It is not just about squashing patches, I am working on a series of
patches to allow compiling out eswitch/eswitch_offloads/en_rep.c/en_tc
altogether, it will come out cleaner as it will remove all ethernet
sriov/eswitch VF representors and eswitch tc offloads stuff with one
kconfig flag, and yet preserve standard QoS functionality from en_tc.
Saeed,
I realize it is not just about squashing patches, however doing that to
someone else's patches is just broken. The Linux kernel way is to build
on top of patches, if they are valid, rather than throwing them all away
and doing it from scratch again bottom up. If there was something
actually wrong with my patches, and I would love to understand if that
is the case, since I don't know 1/100th of the hardware details that you
know, then please share those details.
BTW today you can just remove eswitch from driver and non sriov
configuration will perfectly work with no issues.
Even multi PF configuration will also work, but without l2 mac table,
which means PFs can only see packets with their own static (permanent)
mac addresses, user configured macs will not work on Multi PF
configuration.
It sounds like this shakes up things a little and we will have things
moved to where they actually belong in the hierarchy so that will be a
good thing in the end :)
For that i will take the l2 table (ConnectX PF mac table) logic out of
eswitch as it is not really an eswitch logic, and move it to core
driver to allow Multi PF configuration to work without eswitch.
Sounds good.
I will post some patches for you to review by end of week.
Could we please start seeing this stuff happen in a public git tree so
it is possible to follow and contribute to the development? It is very
frustrating having to wait for things to appear and and not knowing
whether a patch is integrated or needs to be revised when you have
things building on top of it.
Jes
