Hi Folks, Any response to these queries? I'm uncomfortable TBH with this feature going in to 2.18 unless these are addressed/resolved. From an Intel perspective we're more than happy to test and review but there are genuine issues to be discussed I feel below before merge.
Thanks Ian From: Amber, Kumar <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 10:52 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]>; Van Haaren, Harry <[email protected]>; Stokes, Ian <[email protected]> Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH 1/14] Rename flags with CKSUM to CSUM Hi Flavio, Mike, I did have a quick look over the patch-set https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/?series=307485 I have some comments over the patches mentioned below: 1. Can a Cover letter be provided with the patch-set to understand the intent/approach of patch-set to the problem? a. A cover letter would give the series a better title, and a place to give a high-level overview of approach. 2. There are two big concerns with the patch-set: a. The SW fallback patch is marked as an _untested_ patch to showcase the proposed solution. Given its untested status, we assume it is not a candidate for 2.18. b. Changing of default behavior of TSO/GSO to default ON, why is this necessary? Features are typically "opt in", what makes TSO/GSO different? 3. Can the patch-set be split into 2 logical parts being CSUM and TSO/GSO, any thoughts on this? Regards Amber _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
