On 07/12/17 14:48, Jan Scheurich wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, 07 December, 2017 14:28
This is preparation for 'struct dp_netdev_pmd_thread' modification
in upcoming commits. Needed to avoid reordering and regrouping while
replacing old and adding new members.
Should this be part of the TX batching set? Anyway, I'm ok if it's not stalling
the approval :)
Unfortunately yes, because members reordered and regrouped just to include
new members: pmd->ctx and pmd->n_output_batches. This could not be a standalone
change because adding of different members will require different regrouping/
reordering. I moved this change to a separate patch to not do this twice while
adding each member in patches 2/7 and 6/7.
Anyway, as I mentioned in cover letter, I still prefer reverting of the padding
at all by this patch:
https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2017-November/341153.html
I think we should not spent time designing and reviewing these kind of patches
that are made necessary by the introduction of commit
a807c15796ddc43ba1ffb2a6b0bd2ad4e2b73941.
As far as I can see there was never a single review on the original patch:
https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2017-October/339402.html
I wonder how it got merged into master in the first place.
I strongly support Ilya's revert patch for that commit:
https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2017-November/341153.html
Let's do that quickly to remove some of the obstacles to merging important
patches in time for OVS 2.9.
BR, Jan
Looking at the above, and going over the patches, I also agree undoing
the commit is the right thing to do.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
