From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A5411D551; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:01:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712242919; cv=none; b=CNgwtdJYgSWk/6HCzfKI5PtHheMhPDt1V5N2Ec9sVxNtgK8sBXYw95dxhgxagGgjLmsGBt0fXScCxlW2AClr1uxgq2P7yjT62PrHPs86JzQx54qDTsU2uQfrEcmOO9AkITaXfcISHbZ+Wol4VdUHI06eJkV599ZjzsP1S2DhRWY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712242919; c=relaxed/simple; bh=m37CGWgGDzDmqqe0wk4eeU3R+P2kwq9EU6P+HBudePA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VOAfbJGO5BUgzB3qSD/o1HLUVN24QIMCpvD+jBGS9p/DlZyr8ruVzX1dz3LlPk218+wxqwTg/cXzKgQcHZiObEfDYgEoyIzs2/kCOYBY930KBwX6LtJRQoQHFG/MFrnrNBOrL1v4zvERcpfViEpFG53aHsi/9tqAMb56H/mFh90= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=qaVIpo7K; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="qaVIpo7K" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D121C433C7; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:01:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1712242918; bh=m37CGWgGDzDmqqe0wk4eeU3R+P2kwq9EU6P+HBudePA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=qaVIpo7KcwdH/2KGDFx1mUZTuMagPUnp8++R3YOCdX87zDybHhWnCcJC3PyNi2bW9 BI7jfEPRj8JzPlIooc9+HkzESGwDGV6Y9ij240rM/UHWhO20Q+XTXJCTPeNzihyEbG TYRbqil/VAwNNwbUzFisJ6vOTzjsdxiX39pCHfqNImY5YpMsM3zV3vGydohSsx0veC Kik4rPAp1JZYjLXiu55enmnEQ6MnLLMfpUpbPN/UwffcReqM68sIBC+paK/A+EYTL6 AeJMDxRdfWiHbkDTbZANN2Rsvjl38dw5kKQ5XVqVo4cDL+4hxI+lFqFr95RcUZOJCs dLhuGXRiUHz0g== From: Kalle Valo To: Breno Leitao Cc: aleksander.lobakin@intel.com, kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, elder@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, nbd@nbd.name, sean.wang@mediatek.com, Mark-MC.Lee@mediatek.com, lorenzo@kernel.org, taras.chornyi@plvision.eu, Matthias Brugger , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com, leon@kernel.org, dennis.dalessandro@cornelisnetworks.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/5] allocate dummy device dynamically References: <20240404114854.2498663-1-leitao@debian.org> <87plv549ts.fsf@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 18:01:52 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Breno Leitao's message of "Thu, 4 Apr 2024 07:22:03 -0700") Message-ID: <87le5t41en.fsf@kernel.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Breno Leitao writes: > Hello Kalle, > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 02:59:59PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Breno Leitao writes: >> >> > struct net_device shouldn't be embedded into any structure, instead, >> > the owner should use the private space to embed their state into >> > net_device. >> > >> > But, in some cases the net_device is embedded inside the private >> > structure, which blocks the usage of zero-length arrays inside >> > net_device. >> > >> > Create a helper to allocate a dummy device at dynamically runtime, and >> > move the Ethernet devices to use it, instead of embedding the dummy >> > device inside the private structure. >> > >> > This fixes all the network cases except for wireless drivers. >> > >> > PS: Due to lack of hardware, unfortunately all these patches are >> > compiled tested only. >> >> BTW if it helps, and if you have an ath10k or ath11k patch already, I >> can run a quick test on real hardware. > > That would be very much appreciated! Thanks! > > I don't have them ready yet, but, I will work on them soon and I will > send it to you probably tomorrow. > > Should I send them as RFC, or as a regular patch, and we iterate over? > What would you prefer? A regular patch, like you did last time with ath11k, is fine for me. But please do add a lore or patchwork link to the depency patchset so that I'm testing with correct patches. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches