Hi Yi, I very much doubt that it makes sense to first merge the obsolete user-space patches and then override them with the target version.
Jarno and Joe have in principle agreed to merge the new user-space patches independently of the backport of the kernel datapath patches. So there is no dependency in this direction. If it is not possible to merge the kernel datapath back-ports without test cases, then I think the datapath merge should wait for the merge of the new user-space patches and then add end-to-end test cases for the kernel datapath as well. But perhaps such end-to-end tests are not strictly necessary. It appears to me that Jiri's L3 tunneling datapath patches were merged into net-next without such test cases (just based on code review). So why not in OVS tree? We can then add end-to-end kernel datapath tests when the Eric's outstanding user-space patches for rtnetlink and compat tunnel configuration for L3 tunnels are added. BR, Jan > -----Original Message----- > From: Yang, Yi Y [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, 08 February, 2017 06:31 > To: Jan Scheurich <[email protected]>; Joe Stringer <[email protected]>; > Jiri Benc ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Eric > Garver <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v3 00/16] port Jiri Benc's L3 patchset to ovs > > I'll check how we can rebase your changes against those three patches on top > of my patches, our goals are same, that is to merge your > changes and this patch set to ovs. I don't know what order Joe will merge > them in. Obviously one patch set can't depend on another one > which isn't nailed down to merge or not. > > Jan, let us have a sync by lync meeting. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Scheurich [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 7:19 AM > To: Joe Stringer <[email protected]>; Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]>; Jiri Benc > ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Eric Garver > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v3 00/16] port Jiri Benc's L3 patchset to ovs > > Hi Yi, > > Both Joe and Jarno have indicated there are no principle problems merging our > self-contained user-space patches for L3 tunneling. May I > suggest that you (together with Jiri and Eric) focus on the datapath > back-ports and the user-space patches on top needed to configure L3 > tunnels in the net-next and OVS tree kernel module. > > /Jan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joe Stringer [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, 07 February, 2017 18:55 > > To: Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]> > > Cc: Jan Scheurich <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v3 00/16] port Jiri Benc's L3 patchset > > to ovs > > > > On 7 February 2017 at 05:28, Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Jan, I know that, but per Joe's comments, it seems he won't merge your > > > patch set unless the part in kernel side is merged before them. > > It can't work without these three patches. > > > > I have primarily expressed concern about missing kernel patch > > backports due to inconsistent backporting order. If Jan's series is > > decoupled and still builds OK, tests OK, passes review, etc by itself > > then I'm not sure I understand the dependency on the kernel patches. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
