public inbox for netdev@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] iproute: Add support for extended ack to rtnl_talk
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 09:47:29 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170804094729.00548085@xeon-e3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170804113147.GA25254@vergenet.net>

On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 13:31:48 +0200
Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 02:26:58PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> > On 5/18/17 10:24 PM, David Ahern wrote:  
> > > On 5/18/17 3:02 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:  
> > >> So effectively this means libmnl has to be used for new stuff, noone
> > >> has time to do the work to convert the existing tooling over (which
> > >> by itself might be a challenge in testing everything to make sure
> > >> there are no regressions) given there's not much activity around
> > >> lib/libnetlink.c anyway, and existing users not using libmnl today
> > >> won't see/notice new improvements on netlink side when they do an
> > >> upgrade. So we'll be stuck with that dual library mess pretty much
> > >> for a very long time. :(  
> > > 
> > > lib/libnetlink.c with all of its duplicate functions weighs in at just
> > > 947 LOC -- a mere 12% of the code in lib/. From a total SLOC of iproute2
> > > it is a negligible part of the code base.
> > > 
> > > Given that, there is very little gain -- but a lot of risk in
> > > regressions -- in converting such a small, low level code base to libmnl
> > > just for the sake of using a library - something Phil noted in his
> > > cursory attempt at converting ip to libmnl. ie., The level effort
> > > required vs the benefit is just not worth it.
> > > 
> > > There are so many other parts of the ip code base that need work with a
> > > much higher return on the time investment.
> > >   
> > 
> > Stephen: It has been 3 months since the first extack patches were posted
> > and still nothing in iproute2, all of it hung up on your decision to
> > require libmnl. Do you plan to finish the libmnl support any time soon
> > and send out patches?  
> 
> FWIIW I would also like to see some way to get this enhancement accepted.

I will put in the libmnl version. If it doesn't work because no one sent
me test cases, then fine. send a patch for that.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-04 16:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-03 23:56 [RFC] iproute: Add support for extended ack to rtnl_talk Stephen Hemminger
2017-05-04  9:36 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-05-04 14:27   ` David Ahern
2017-05-04 14:41     ` David Miller
2017-05-04 15:50       ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2017-05-04 16:43       ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-05-04 20:43         ` Phil Sutter
2017-05-14  1:29           ` David Ahern
2017-05-16 16:36             ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-05-18 10:02               ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-05-18 14:55                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-05-19  4:24                 ` David Ahern
2017-08-03 20:26                   ` David Ahern
2017-08-04 11:31                     ` Simon Horman
2017-08-04 16:47                       ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2017-08-07 16:48                         ` David Ahern
2017-08-07 18:06                           ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-08-07 18:09                             ` David Ahern
2017-08-07 18:45                               ` David Miller
2017-08-07 19:12                                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-08-07 20:26                                   ` David Miller
2017-08-07 21:21                                     ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-05-04 14:37   ` Leon Romanovsky
2017-05-04 16:45     ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-05-04 17:55       ` Leon Romanovsky
2017-05-06 10:36         ` Jiri Pirko
2017-05-04 16:42   ` Stephen Hemminger

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=20170804094729.00548085@xeon-e3 \
    --to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=phil@nwl.cc \
    --cc=simon.horman@netronome.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox