Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (dropped patches?)

Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (dropped patches?)

[Chuck Ebbert]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 at 23:54:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

> This summarises my current thinking on various patches which are presently
> in -mm.  I cover large things and small-but-controversial things.  Anything
> which isn't covered here (and that's a lot of material) is probably a "will
> merge", unless it obviously isn't.

What happened to:

        remove-last_rx-update-from-loopback-device.patch

It was dropped in 2.6.12-rc1-mm4 with a status of "merged" but it's not
in either 2.6.12 or 2.6.13-rc1.

And in general, who is tracking whether things are being lost?


--
Chuck

Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (dropped patches?)

[Andrew Morton]

Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 at 23:54:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > This summarises my current thinking on various patches which are presently
> > in -mm.  I cover large things and small-but-controversial things.  Anything
> > which isn't covered here (and that's a lot of material) is probably a "will
> > merge", unless it obviously isn't.
> 
> What happened to:
> 
>         remove-last_rx-update-from-loopback-device.patch

Davem rejected it.  hm, I can't find the email trail - it was cc'ed to
netdev@oss.sgi.com mid-March, but nothing seems to have been sent back.

> It was dropped in 2.6.12-rc1-mm4 with a status of "merged" but it's not
> in either 2.6.12 or 2.6.13-rc1.
> 
> And in general, who is tracking whether things are being lost?

Things don't get lost.  I have a habit of misremembering the disposition of
patches when preparing -mm release summaries.

Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (dropped patches?)

[David S. Miller]

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:14:56 -0700

> Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com> wrote:
> >
> > What happened to:
> > 
> >         remove-last_rx-update-from-loopback-device.patch
> 
> Davem rejected it.  hm, I can't find the email trail - it was cc'ed to
> netdev@oss.sgi.com mid-March, but nothing seems to have been sent back.

Every network device must reliably set ->last_rx, there are parts
of the kernel which depend upon this attribute having an accurate
value.

The bonding driver is one example.  And whilst one can argue that
loopback is unlikely to be used as part of a bond, it's massively
better from a consistency perspective if this invariant can be
relied upon across all networking drivers.

In short, the NUMA scalability hacks to loopback have gotten out
of control, and we need to stop this madness somewhere.