From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: Shepherd request (P83): Multipath TCP: Present Use Cases and an
 Upstream Future
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 17:36:14 +0200
Message-ID: <20180522153614.GK2149@nanopsycho>
References: <1526954781-35359-1-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
 <1526954781-35359-3-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
 <20180522090637.GE2149@nanopsycho>
 <20180522090853.GF2149@nanopsycho>
 <39081bce-3913-5b07-3d07-0c476fca5e78@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: mst@redhat.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, davem@davemloft.net,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com,
        alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, kubakici@wp.pl, jasowang@redhat.com,
        loseweigh@gmail.com, aaron.f.brown@intel.com,
        anjali.singhai@intel.com
To: "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f196.google.com ([209.85.128.196]:46791 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751600AbeEVPgX (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 22 May 2018 11:36:23 -0400
Received: by mail-wr0-f196.google.com with SMTP id x9-v6so18140564wrl.13
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 22 May 2018 08:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <39081bce-3913-5b07-3d07-0c476fca5e78@intel.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:28:42PM CEST, sridhar.samudrala@intel.com wrote:
>
>On 5/22/2018 2:08 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:06:37AM CEST, jiri@resnulli.us wrote:
>> > Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:06:18AM CEST, sridhar.samudrala@intel.com wrote:
>> > > Use the registration/notification framework supported by the generic
>> > > failover infrastructure.
>> > > 
>> > > Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
>> > In previous patchset versions, the common code did
>> > netdev_rx_handler_register() and netdev_upper_dev_link() etc
>> > (netvsc_vf_join()). Now, this is still done in netvsc. Why?
>> > 
>> > This should be part of the common "failover" code.
>
>Based on Stephen's feedback on earlier patches, i tried to minimize the changes to
>netvsc and only commonize the notifier and the main event handler routine.
>Another complication is that netvsc does part of registration in a delayed workqueue.

:( This kind of degrades the whole efford of having single solution
in "failover" module. I think that common parts, as
netdev_rx_handler_register() and others certainly is should be inside
the common module. This is not a good time to minimize changes. Let's do
the thing properly and fix the netvsc mess now.


>
>It should be possible to move some of the code from net_failover.c to generic
>failover.c in future if Stephen is ok with it.
>
>
>> > 
>> Also note that in the current patchset you use IFF_FAILOVER flag for
>> master, yet for the slave you use IFF_SLAVE. That is wrong.
>> IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE should be used.
>
>Not sure which code you are referring to.  I only set IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE
>in patch 3.

The existing netvsc driver.