From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EC5CC433E4 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:25:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353962071A for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:25:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cloudflare.com header.i=@cloudflare.com header.b="C5QgKmMN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732827AbgGVPZI (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:25:08 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60466 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732746AbgGVPZH (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:25:07 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x142.google.com (mail-lf1-x142.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::142]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B176C0619DF for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:25:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x142.google.com with SMTP id b30so1523030lfj.12 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:25:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudflare.com; s=google; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=ZZVwlxeqmX6G0EA/Mr693geGtRjCRxDovI8UeX3tF/E=; b=C5QgKmMNi+duOmChNMdNcV7BGLjrPc3dfMM+ZXrRADwRwk9gQmIk9fyldZ8raTbfsY +OoZL6gEZ+O+mW/cguLPp4m+bFPF2MyxCw8213plzO16nE+FM2d/mwgx1v89BPTVDE0A onNVGJZK10OLklPw6MDZurhbTKsl32XQFTgDk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=ZZVwlxeqmX6G0EA/Mr693geGtRjCRxDovI8UeX3tF/E=; b=Y3oO3bGMhXRZkGpzkEOsCjYpOj/afunF/Zu7FY5gjlAEAzBKVYwIc+CZzJjZomgipE WILeKtd9ZCJkkAbxAlZTmYLnb65C3BcJ2AQT2xNLwLTGM09JGCOnuZYyZuuI9Wzf+sZ6 Dffpk4J3AE6LA3urBGHusB06ehfT29uqCZwwINDSbCjPECEoXcFfMpVfh8BjtnaGDbks rciDDK/oapkbnaNu2+PvEmnUH5YfNaQ6KPkOIR42dTLYRp0pwDs8akMeJIkw6z9rwHdz FzjICSVdPYMJxukSits9gQA071AwivjE3y1GtXckSpzi9TNxKbUg91CDScQ0XHjb185a KVDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531CqXnfR5w8VEHVDOn4gSLb7eAYsDnMQwniFCAhqlXDLP6uBSqU vByvVBtu2P5VfOU5PoNTRpHFcpubZz8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJytm/cO+POWytM1rrXYfKAEreT3hfBCxb11O1PqsNQPR1Eago6islkfmq8GEVq+PzNlx90VdA== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4158:: with SMTP id c24mr16372289lfi.109.1595431505679; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cloudflare.com ([2a02:a310:c262:aa00:b35e:8938:2c2a:ba8b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h21sm194610ljk.31.2020.07.22.08.25.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:25:05 -0700 (PDT) References: <87wo2vwxq6.fsf@cloudflare.com> <20200722144212.27106-1-kuniyu@amazon.co.jp> <87v9ifwq2p.fsf@cloudflare.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 26.3 From: Jakub Sitnicki To: Willem de Bruijn Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , David Miller , kernel-team , linux-kernel , Linux-Next Mailing List , Network Development , Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net tree In-reply-to: Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:25:04 +0200 Message-ID: <87tuxzwp0v.fsf@cloudflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 05:05 PM CEST, Willem de Bruijn wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:02 AM Jakub Sitnicki wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 04:42 PM CEST, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: >> > Can I submit a patch to net tree that rewrites udp[46]_lib_lookup2() to >> > use only 'result' ? >> >> Feel free. That should make the conflict resolution even easier later >> on. > > Thanks for the detailed analysis, Jakub. > > Would it be easier to fix this wholly in bpf-next, by introducing > reuseport_result there? Did you mean replicating the Kuniyuki fix in bpf-next, or just introducing the intermediate 'reuseport_result' var? I'm assuming the former, so that the conflict resolving later on will reduce to selecting everything from bpf-next side. TBH, I don't what is the preferred way to handle it. Perhaps DaveM or Alexei/Daniel can say what would make their life easiest?