Hi Yi,
I suggest we include (adapted versions of) your vxlan-gpe user space
patches into the new L3 tunneling user-space series when we respin v2
with the review comments. Thus we get rid of one dependency. And you can
focus on the datapath backports and NSH. Do you agree?
@Jarno: It would be great if you could find the time to review the new
series.
Thanks, Jan
On 2017-02-09 11:46, Yang, Yi Y wrote:
Jan, I'm ok, I will rebase those patches once ovs maintainers merge your
patches first. In my patches, I added vxlan-gpe user space support, that needs
those three user space patches, that is why I included those three user space
patches in my patch set.
I don't know what order ovs maintainers will merge them in. I can only focus on
userspace support for vxlan-gpe if ovs maintainers really merge your patches
first.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Scheurich [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 5:50 PM
To: Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]>; Joe Stringer <[email protected]>; Jiri Benc
([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Eric Garver <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Jarno Rajahalme ([email protected]) <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v3 00/16] port Jiri Benc's L3 patchset to ovs
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
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
