Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <fb5ab568-9bc8-3145-a8db-3e975ccdf846@gmail.com>
 <20200331060641.79999-1-maowenan@huawei.com> <7a1d55ad-1427-67fe-f204-4d4a0ab2c4b1@gmail.com>
 <20200401181419.7acd2aa6@carbon> <ede2f407-839e-d29e-0ebe-aa39dd461bfd@gmail.com>
 <20200402110619.48f31a63@carbon> <CAADnVQKEyv_bRhEfu1Jp=DSggj_O2xjJyd_QZ7a4LJY+dUO2rg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200403095847.21e1e5ea@carbon>
In-Reply-To: <20200403095847.21e1e5ea@carbon>
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:12:54 -0700
Message-ID: <CAADnVQKs9hLUPB6vW+sC3pe1ivXKU3woJFvT=X2hCqT=NnZF7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] veth: xdp: use head instead of hard_start
To:     Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc:     Toshiaki Makita <toshiaki.makita1@gmail.com>,
        Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>, jwi@linux.ibm.com,
        jianglidong3@jd.com, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:59 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
<brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> I want to wait to ease your life as maintainer. This is part of a
> larger patchset (for XDP frame_sz) and the next patch touch same code
> path and thus depend on these code adjustments.  If we apply them in
> bpf vs bpf-next then you/we will have to handle merge conflicts.  The
> severity of the "fix" is really low, it only means 32 bytes less
> headroom (which I doubt anyone is using).

Ahh. Make sense. That type of fix can wait.
Thanks!