* [ANN] netdev call - May 7th @ 2024-05-06 14:52 Jakub Kicinski 2024-05-07 14:05 ` Andrew Lunn 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Jakub Kicinski @ 2024-05-06 14:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netdev, netdev-driver-reviewers Hi! The bi-weekly call is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 am (PT) / 5:30 pm (~EU). Last call before the merge window. No agenda items have been submitted so far. See you at https://bbb.lwn.net/b/jak-wkr-seg-hjn ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [ANN] netdev call - May 7th 2024-05-06 14:52 [ANN] netdev call - May 7th Jakub Kicinski @ 2024-05-07 14:05 ` Andrew Lunn 2024-06-13 12:11 ` Przemek Kitszel 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Andrew Lunn @ 2024-05-07 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jakub Kicinski; +Cc: netdev, netdev-driver-reviewers On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 07:52:57AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Hi! > > The bi-weekly call is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 am (PT) / > 5:30 pm (~EU). Last call before the merge window. No agenda > items have been submitted so far. > > See you at https://bbb.lwn.net/b/jak-wkr-seg-hjn Maybe we can have a quick discussion and poll about: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20240507090520.284821-1-wei.fang@nxp.com/ Do we want patches like this? What do people think about guard() vs scoped_guard(). Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [ANN] netdev call - May 7th 2024-05-07 14:05 ` Andrew Lunn @ 2024-06-13 12:11 ` Przemek Kitszel 2024-06-13 13:20 ` Andrew Lunn 2024-06-13 13:50 ` Jakub Kicinski 0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Przemek Kitszel @ 2024-06-13 12:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Lunn, Jakub Kicinski; +Cc: netdev, netdev-driver-reviewers On 5/7/24 16:05, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 07:52:57AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> Hi! >> >> The bi-weekly call is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 am (PT) / >> 5:30 pm (~EU). Last call before the merge window. No agenda >> items have been submitted so far. >> >> See you at https://bbb.lwn.net/b/jak-wkr-seg-hjn > > Maybe we can have a quick discussion and poll about: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20240507090520.284821-1-wei.fang@nxp.com/ > > Do we want patches like this? What do people think about guard() vs > scoped_guard(). > > Andrew > Was it discussed? Any conclusions? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [ANN] netdev call - May 7th 2024-06-13 12:11 ` Przemek Kitszel @ 2024-06-13 13:20 ` Andrew Lunn 2024-06-13 13:50 ` Jakub Kicinski 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Andrew Lunn @ 2024-06-13 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Przemek Kitszel; +Cc: Jakub Kicinski, netdev, netdev-driver-reviewers On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 02:11:11PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote: > On 5/7/24 16:05, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 07:52:57AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > The bi-weekly call is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 am (PT) / > > > 5:30 pm (~EU). Last call before the merge window. No agenda > > > items have been submitted so far. > > > > > > See you at https://bbb.lwn.net/b/jak-wkr-seg-hjn > > > > Maybe we can have a quick discussion and poll about: > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20240507090520.284821-1-wei.fang@nxp.com/ > > > > Do we want patches like this? What do people think about guard() vs > > scoped_guard(). > > > > Andrew > > > Was it discussed? Any conclusions? Sorry, i should of submitted a netdev FAQ Documentation patch by now. The summary is: scoped_guard() is O.K. for new code. guard() is too magical, and should not be used. Neither should be used in old code, where we perceive a danger it will actually cause more bugs when back porting fixes. We do acknowledge these mechanisms could be useful at avoiding bugs, but want to wait and see how they work out in practice. It could be the restrictions on reworking old code is lifted, and guard() allowed, in a few years. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [ANN] netdev call - May 7th 2024-06-13 12:11 ` Przemek Kitszel 2024-06-13 13:20 ` Andrew Lunn @ 2024-06-13 13:50 ` Jakub Kicinski 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Jakub Kicinski @ 2024-06-13 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Przemek Kitszel; +Cc: Andrew Lunn, netdev, netdev-driver-reviewers On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:11:11 +0200 Przemek Kitszel wrote: > Was it discussed? Any conclusions? Y'all keep reinventing and working around locks with gazillion flags. I really hope the step 0 for you will be to figure out a sane locking scheme :( guard() is not gonna change the math. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-06-13 13:50 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2024-05-06 14:52 [ANN] netdev call - May 7th Jakub Kicinski 2024-05-07 14:05 ` Andrew Lunn 2024-06-13 12:11 ` Przemek Kitszel 2024-06-13 13:20 ` Andrew Lunn 2024-06-13 13:50 ` Jakub Kicinski
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).