Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <08d4d56b4b2ef422e2724e99a0a4d21baed7c9b5.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/8] Add support for two classes of VCAP rules
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To:     Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@microchip.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Casper Andersson <casper.casan@gmail.com>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>,
        Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com>,
        Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@microchip.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Dec 2022 17:12:10 +0100
In-Reply-To: <cc41ccf443b1f2c7a4cb5e247dabfa53a6674226.camel@microchip.com>
References: <20221221132517.2699698-1-steen.hegelund@microchip.com>
         <0efd4a7072fb90cc9bc9992b00d9ade233a38de1.camel@redhat.com>
         <cc41ccf443b1f2c7a4cb5e247dabfa53a6674226.camel@microchip.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.4 (3.42.4-2.fc35) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 16:02 +0100, Steen Hegelund wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 15:22 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > Despite the 'net' target, this looks really like net-next material as
> > most patches look like large refactor. I see there are a bunch of fixes
> > in patches 3-8, but quite frankly it's not obvious at all what the
> > refactors/new features described into the commit messages themself
> > really fix.
> 
> Yes the patches 3-8 is the response to Michael Walles observations on LAN966x
> and Jakubs Kicinski comment (see link), but the description in the commits may
> not be that clear, in the sense that they do not state one-to-one what the
> mitigation is.
> 
> See https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20221209150332.79a921fd@kernel.org/
> 
> So essentially this makes it possible to have rules that are always in the VCAP
> HW (to make the PTP feature work), even before the TC chains have been
> established (which was the problem that Michael encountered).
> 
> I still think this a net submission, since it fixes the problem that was
> observed in the previous netnext window.
> 
> But I will rephrase the reasoning in a V2 to hopefully make that more
> understandable.
> 
> If you still think it is better to post this in the upcoming net-next window, I
> am also OK with that.

IMHO this series is quite too invasive for net, especially considering
it will possibly land into the Linus tree with a timeframe promising a
large latency in response to any problem.

If there is any kind of available workaround to address the issue
(comprising disabling h/w offload) I *think* net-next would be a better
option.

Cheers,

Paolo