From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-179.mta0.migadu.com (out-179.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5228919DF4F for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2026 00:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.179 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772150769; cv=none; b=MjNwYdHIxyB2/UF4kvXfYqr+wKlocb+qSy425Qa4a9XiNFlX/ZulY7rClbn24obQXGr1o0Pgo6kEn4z0B/Rw5Zcz219y9T+XJpoEDyhrCtJ4IDQF50NVT7SJ6/fBB5JFh9bD8xnlM86pb6kWXCzGWjDuNAzgg+7qe5aMJEc016k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772150769; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JOCyhNM2dy+R0wuiPlgjErmmNfNjqBRx7kHoDDyhui0=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=BUOQh7QSHM3zQjJtyv574O21qawh6DCwXa168MTuJFWV5hXKMWH0B64Dm31LUeT80Ziqa9y+KwhhCkw55X9aHR9brFVYfO7BF6l4/eEUoiwSqBnDJgV8LTiT3vvuioJ4kYfEOaX5De5nbQtqkZn3f2caKohFZIeG2FKG3FFiNHU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=M5PtqJVm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.179 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="M5PtqJVm" Message-ID: <8098445a-c778-4b11-be88-6243aba98268@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1772150765; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A8A1xEq8Fxp2J6ncLujVbWR5bTzFfSfO521RgjNbBEI=; b=M5PtqJVmoKPLvr2WLPx2eb4YdPRrjPWbasa99aIeJAGyz0Fqc3nDwEOjNGKK3fnbB3s35R oXGDzDkZreovGYSAIBE3kO4+OD997YZIT5ZhRWmiqOSO2Qm+PpTwSF2jHh8ogLs3RDTL+C mySROwpG1si5yaFRHYSK5odlzimlOMM= Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2026 16:06:01 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Add network namespace support To: David Ahern , Leon Romanovsky Cc: zyjzyj2000@gmail.com, jgg@ziepe.ca, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org References: <20260225172622.7589-1-dsahern@kernel.org> <18ecbd06-baac-43ee-a455-6b34c716fdfe@kernel.org> <88b82e8b-40da-46cf-bb41-2c346bd28c70@linux.dev> <20260226064755.GA12611@unreal> <8ed32ed9-3931-4b2b-8f44-0023aa998b5c@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: "yanjun.zhu" In-Reply-To: <8ed32ed9-3931-4b2b-8f44-0023aa998b5c@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 2/26/26 8:06 AM, David Ahern wrote: > On 2/26/26 8:51 AM, Zhu Yanjun wrote: >> Thanks a lot for your reply.  I’ve already submitted a similar patch >> earlier. > > In Jan 2021, rxe had no network namespace support. We fixed that and > carried a patch (in stealth mode at the time). > > In Feb 2026, rxe in Linus' master and rdma-next do not have network > namespace support. I sent our well tested solution that works out of the > box with behavior similar to how init_net works. > > If you are interested in your design approach getting merged, then make > it happen for 7.0-next. If you do not have the time to commit to it now, > then step back and let this patch move forward. That is how Linux works > - post ready-to-merge patches, not intentions. Hi, David Thank you for your feedback and for pushing this forward. I completely agree that "ready-to-merge patches" are what drive the kernel forward. To that end, I have just finished rebasing and updating my implementation from 6.14 to the current 6.19-rc (and it’s ready for 7.0-next). I have full respect for your long-standing work on this. Since we both have functional solutions now, I suggest we quickly compare the design. My goal is the same as yours: to finally get netns support into rxe for 7.0. I will post my updated patch set shortly so the maintainers can evaluate both. The patch link is: https://github.com/zhuyj/linux/tree/6.19-net-namespace Please code review. Best regards, Zhu Yanjun >