From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer Subject: Re: [net-next V11 PATCH 00/17] XDP redirect memory return API Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:27:03 +0200 Message-ID: <20180417182703.62ab868f@redhat.com> References: <20180417144841.grzupfd6zax6zhca@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20180417.111820.1693265050355969717.davem@davemloft.net> <89dee120-76a4-f7dd-82ec-1d8a9fcb29d8@iogearbox.net> <20180417.113548.676760038759107548.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: daniel@iogearbox.net, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bjorn.topel@intel.com, magnus.karlsson@intel.com, eugenia@mellanox.com, jasowang@redhat.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, eranbe@mellanox.com, saeedm@mellanox.com, galp@mellanox.com, borkmann@iogearbox.net, tariqt@mellanox.com, brouer@redhat.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:34282 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755606AbeDQQ1N (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2018 12:27:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20180417.113548.676760038759107548.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 11:35:48 -0400 (EDT) David Miller wrote: > From: Daniel Borkmann > Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 17:24:03 +0200 > > > On 04/17/2018 05:18 PM, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Alexei Starovoitov > >> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 07:48:42 -0700 > >> > >>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 04:45:16PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > >>>> Submitted against net-next, as it contains NIC driver changes. > >>>> > >>>> This patchset works towards supporting different XDP RX-ring memory > >>>> allocators. As this will be needed by the AF_XDP zero-copy mode. > >> ... > >>> The series look good to me now. > >>> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov > >> > >> Pushed out to net-next, thanks everyone! > > > > See my comment on the last patch which is actually buggy. But given it's > > pushed out already, then it needs to be fixed as follow-up.. > > Yes it will need to be dealt with as a follow-up. Okay, will deal with this as a followup. That was actually why I submitted V10 without the last patch, as I though that required separate upstream review, which turned out to be true. And I was planning to submit it after V10 was accepted. (I did have the last patch in "offlist" review with Alexei and Daniel (but I guess Daniel didn't had time to review it, I just falsely assumed he had looked at it)). -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer