From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3] net: af_packet: Untangle packet_snd by adding vpacket_snd Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 07:11:02 +0200 Message-ID: <1305263462.2831.11.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <20110512.175959.1343349350164758016.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Joe Perches Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Le jeudi 12 mai 2011 =C3=A0 16:25 -0700, Joe Perches a =C3=A9crit : > The current packet_snd handles both vlan and non-vlan frames > with initialization of a struct virtio_net_hdr that is unused > by non-vlan frames. >=20 > Create a new vpacket_snd that uses this virtio_net_hdr and > remove it and the vlan and gso logic from packet_snd. >=20 1) I find this kind of patches a real pain, frankly. When I have to look around code and commits to find bugs and bugs origins, I'll have to fully check this kind of patch, and this slow dow= n the process a _lot_, because I have no idea if "Joe Perches" actually tested the patch, or if its yet another "code beautifier" process in th= e wild. You should have shooted when/before commit bfd5f4a3 (packet: Add GSO/csum offload support) was accepted. 2) You did not CCed Sridhar Samudrala , the author of above commit. I dont think David will take the time to test your patch. 3) You add some non codingstyle artifacts. I am afraid it makes me nervous for patches bringing no real values but shuffling the code and making maintainers life more difficult.