From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 3/3] switchdev: introduce deferred variants
 of obj_add/del helpers
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 17:41:43 +0300
Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMhiqfbQRYbAaY5Lxs3oo-XqLQmokNTkXP4qYaocMNZZkw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1444242652-17260-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us>
	<1444242652-17260-4-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us>
	<CAJ3xEMhEupHZvdQfBucemQwyjtQUcwwc5D5MhYqpctJGqtcTsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151008082858.GC2186@nanopsycho.orion>
	<20151008130910.GJ2186@nanopsycho.orion>
	<CAJ3xEMjq7bXCrWpHuZV5W8VZxYJX-60=UPW=QjbVUtjrJ9e-RQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151008132541.GK2186@nanopsycho.orion>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, idosch@mellanox.com,
	Elad Raz <eladr@mellanox.com>,
	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@gmail.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	john fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-io0-f193.google.com ([209.85.223.193]:36841 "EHLO
	mail-io0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S933288AbbJHOlo (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:41:44 -0400
Received: by ioiz6 with SMTP id z6so6083448ioi.3
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 07:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20151008132541.GK2186@nanopsycho.orion>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
> Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 03:21:44PM CEST, gerlitz.or@gmail.com wrote:
>>On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>>> Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 10:28:58AM CEST, jiri@resnulli.us wrote:
>>>>Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 08:45:58AM CEST, gerlitz.or@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>>
>>>>>This introduced a regression to the 2-phase commit scheme, since the
>>>>>prepare commit can fail
>>>>>and that would go un-noticed toward the upper layer, agree?
>>
>>>>Well, no. This still does the transaction for all lower devices in one
>>>>go. No change in that.
>>
>>> Now I get it, yes you are right. But currently there is no code in
>>> kernel which would control retval of deferred attr_set or obj_add/del
>>
>>I am not sure to understand your reply. You are saying that when the deferred
>>procedures complete (e.g fail in the prepare phase) they can't actually let
>>the upper layer to realize that this change isn't possible? this is
>>exactly the bug.
>
> Correct. But check the code. Callers of current deferred variants do
> not care about the retval. Therefore this is not a regression.

No sure to follow on (current) callers of current deferred variants,
are there already
deferred  variants for switchdev ops? aren't they introduced in this series?

> It makes sense in my opinion. If you are a called and you explicitly say to
> defer the operation, you cannot expect retval.

yes, this might make sure for the caller, if they want to know the
retval, shouldn't use
the deferred variant.

Or.