From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>
Cc: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@linutronix.de>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Gerhard Engleder <gerhard@engleder-embedded.com>,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 0/4] igb: XDP/ZC follow up
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 14:26:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250221142650.3c74dcac@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z7jnxolsaLICS6zD@LQ3V64L9R2>
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 15:53:26 -0500 Joe Damato wrote:
> > No strong preference. If rtnl_lock is not causing any issues
> > in this driver, the we can merge as is. I haven't followed
> > the past discussions, tho.
>
> Don't mean to side-track this thread, but does this mean you've
> changed your mind on the previous virtio_net thread [1] ?
>
> Or maybe I'm just misreading your response there? And instead I
> could re-spin the virtio_net but dropping the first patch and
> dealing with RTNL in the code like this series is doing?
>
> For some reason I was under the impression that the virtio_net
> series and others like it (like this igb series) were being held
> back until locking work Stanislav is doing is done.
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20250127133756.413efb24@kernel.org/
Yes, you can probably respin v1. Let's not block this.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>
Cc: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@linutronix.de>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Gerhard Engleder <gerhard@engleder-embedded.com>,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v2 0/4] igb: XDP/ZC follow up
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 14:26:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250221142650.3c74dcac@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z7jnxolsaLICS6zD@LQ3V64L9R2>
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 15:53:26 -0500 Joe Damato wrote:
> > No strong preference. If rtnl_lock is not causing any issues
> > in this driver, the we can merge as is. I haven't followed
> > the past discussions, tho.
>
> Don't mean to side-track this thread, but does this mean you've
> changed your mind on the previous virtio_net thread [1] ?
>
> Or maybe I'm just misreading your response there? And instead I
> could re-spin the virtio_net but dropping the first patch and
> dealing with RTNL in the code like this series is doing?
>
> For some reason I was under the impression that the virtio_net
> series and others like it (like this igb series) were being held
> back until locking work Stanislav is doing is done.
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20250127133756.413efb24@kernel.org/
Yes, you can probably respin v1. Let's not block this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-21 22:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-17 11:31 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 0/4] igb: XDP/ZC follow up Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 1/4] igb: Link IRQs to NAPI instances Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-28 9:00 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Rinitha, SX
2025-02-28 9:00 ` Rinitha, SX
2025-02-17 11:31 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 2/4] igb: Link queues " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-18 21:13 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-02-18 21:13 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-19 7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-19 7:41 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-19 17:55 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-02-19 17:55 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-20 7:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-20 7:43 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-28 9:00 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Rinitha, SX
2025-02-28 9:00 ` Rinitha, SX
2025-03-07 22:03 ` Tony Nguyen
2025-03-07 22:03 ` Tony Nguyen
2025-03-10 8:34 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-03-10 8:34 ` Joe Damato
2025-03-10 16:10 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-03-10 16:10 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 3/4] igb: Add support for persistent NAPI config Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-18 21:15 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-02-18 21:15 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-21 13:51 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Loktionov, Aleksandr
2025-02-21 13:51 ` Loktionov, Aleksandr
2025-02-28 9:00 ` Rinitha, SX
2025-02-28 9:00 ` Rinitha, SX
2025-02-17 11:31 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 4/4] igb: Get rid of spurious interrupts Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-17 11:31 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-21 12:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Loktionov, Aleksandr
2025-02-21 12:44 ` Loktionov, Aleksandr
2025-03-07 10:26 ` Kumari, Sweta
2025-03-07 10:26 ` Kumari, Sweta
2025-02-18 21:18 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 0/4] igb: XDP/ZC follow up Joe Damato
2025-02-18 21:18 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-18 22:00 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-02-18 22:00 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-19 14:03 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-19 14:03 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-19 17:51 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-02-19 17:51 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-20 7:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-20 7:44 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-19 7:39 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-19 7:39 ` Kurt Kanzenbach
2025-02-20 2:06 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2025-02-20 2:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-02-21 20:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Joe Damato
2025-02-21 20:53 ` Joe Damato
2025-02-21 22:26 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2025-02-21 22:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250221142650.3c74dcac@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gerhard@engleder-embedded.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=jdamato@fastly.com \
--cc=kurt@linutronix.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.