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: <85f50bf8-8b92-c0f8-d994-24b86be9de5b@sberdevices.ru>
Date:   Fri, 26 May 2023 15:28:13 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.7.1
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/17] vsock: MSG_ZEROCOPY flag support
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
CC:     Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com>,
        <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <kernel@sberdevices.ru>, <oxffffaa@gmail.com>
References: <20230522073950.3574171-1-AVKrasnov@sberdevices.ru>
 <76270fab-8af7-7597-9193-64cb553a543e@sberdevices.ru>
 <y5tgyj5awrd4hvlrsxsvrern6pd2sby2mdtskah2qp5hemmo2a@72nhcpilg7v2>
 <4baf786b-afe5-371d-9bc4-90226e5df3af@sberdevices.ru>
 <sdm43ibxqzdylwxaai4mjj2ucqpduc74ucyg3yrn75dxu2kix5@jynppv7kxyjz>
From:   Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@sberdevices.ru>
In-Reply-To: <sdm43ibxqzdylwxaai4mjj2ucqpduc74ucyg3yrn75dxu2kix5@jynppv7kxyjz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 26.05.2023 15:23, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 02:36:17PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 26.05.2023 13:30, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 06:56:42PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 22.05.2023 10:39, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This patchset is unstable with SOCK_SEQPACKET. I'll fix it.
>>>
>>> Thanks for let us know!
>>>
>>> I'm thinking if we should start split this series in two, because it
>>> becomes too big.
>>>
>>> But let keep this for RFC, we can decide later. An idea is to send
>>> the first 7 patches with a preparation series, and the next ones with a
>>> second series.
>>
>> Hello, ok! So i'll split patchset in the following way:
>> 1) Patches which adds new fields/flags and checks. But all of this is not used,
>>   as it is preparation.
>> 2) Second part starts to use it and also carries tests.
> 
> As long as they're RFCs, maybe you can keep them together if they're
> related, possibly specifying in the cover letter where you'd like to
> split them. When we agree that we are in good shape, we can split it.

Sure! I'll add this information in cover letter of v4

Thanks, Arseniy

> > Thanks,
> Stefano
>