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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, 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 4919EC4338F for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 21:32:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 314CC60F46 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 21:32:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232579AbhHCVco (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 17:32:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49902 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232536AbhHCVcm (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 17:32:42 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102e.google.com (mail-pj1-x102e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5CCDC061757 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102e.google.com with SMTP id g23-20020a17090a5797b02901765d605e14so645109pji.5 for ; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 14:32:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BTtZvpxttvQViWgOaO7ZmD0F1yQql2Bk1h/lcyE75K8=; b=sv0fdiGQDIXY7gNuQ/PZhz30slGWriDzqHLyS3hG7wj5cVTT9HnmhoPuFmpocFNNra T2knDj7II7K/sJTBv58qwOjEVkuYW4bh75SqTwgIv1zIfBumXndIFaS6vOcUiw4CeLEG 4nvLYFfHRnSnQAjWojuN3bePmFeOVS/6SsdJ8UXGZd/cADo8YUA2yRcp3EeaTm/+ijTG XLMlFtpNnqxzXmSNcm6A+l0cZKaGmhfC3BByFIfXu96aHtWV0dWqUngg85mp5RdzkUmp b4XkveriTsTZrazns6PzHkCwuqM2Mk9K7lkTQwgQxDIrX2vDAE4urIPPt+cl3oyoINln 1dOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BTtZvpxttvQViWgOaO7ZmD0F1yQql2Bk1h/lcyE75K8=; b=qeAPGUaH56dxvx9Oa4zfjQP98QQKDxWL8PMTNXO79l/hz1uUAWs408A4k7mnr3bFfC ioukeH/8wIGLaZ3u1lOx/CZpfqKvE1jKOAc0TFs2x7EsZgngWlhRBj434wkK34ppC/Xd ShP7glEUvPt+1ps+cuTAHM2FdHnvbiztNmKNhHhJ7ygBKNtQx9TxJ/kav2BDusEa/1z/ fG+lhoSt5MO8YfZ7f8sahS3llAJI2qDsxXkKHzM229iJaJC9HnOrXv9XnYGiDrof8MGP CFpNub8Z8ucU5CXLqLVQu/UeqcNsvXiZI8rtkCSNE4ulQPSf4ErHyCcUkgRFsEhZ+/il Hpzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530bbhM6ds8t3nguz+gfQ+u9p/2XdrPTy4btZLDtcuNdDsMq9X/d Wpl1MAwTrplHKy4T6tKBXVhZ9oVjIdiI+ek63zs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw50xQEJ1wWupq5b76mxISzHf6PNXjja5aWI/8IJZIjlen3N4dEyZnGwatnga26Pfg2Ss6QPrSsi90XH/xgTuk= X-Received: by 2002:a65:4384:: with SMTP id m4mr408289pgp.428.1628026350459; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 14:32:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210803123921.2374485-1-kuba@kernel.org> <20210803141839.79e99e23@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> In-Reply-To: <20210803141839.79e99e23@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> From: Cong Wang Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:32:19 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Revert "netdevsim: Add multi-queue support" To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: David Miller , Linux Kernel Network Developers , "Cong Wang ." , Peilin Ye Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 2:18 PM Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 10:11:13 -0700 Cong Wang wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 5:39 AM Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > > > > This reverts commit d4861fc6be581561d6964700110a4dede54da6a6. > > > > > > netdevsim is for enabling upstream tests, two weeks in > > > and there's no sign of upstream test using the "mutli-queue" > > > option. > > > > Since when netdevsim is *only* for upstream tests? > > Since it was created. Why it was created only for upstream? IOW, what's wrong with using it only for non-upstream tests? BTW, we also use dummy device for testing, it is not only for upstream. It is extremely odd to single netdevsim out. I don't see any special reason here. > > > Even if so, where is this documented? And why not just point it > > out when reviewing it instead of silently waiting for weeks? > > I was AFK for the last two weeks. How about documenting it in netdev-FAQ (or literally any doc)? This would save everyone's time. > > > > We can add this option back when such test materializes. > > > Right now it's dead code. > > > > It is clearly not dead. We internally used it for testing sch_mq, > > this is clearly stated in the git log. > > Please contribute those tests upstream or keep any test harness > they require where such test are, out of tree. Peilin will add tc-testing for sch_mq which requires this netdevsim feature. > > > How did you draw such a conclusion without talking to authors? > > There is no upstream test using this code, and I did CC you, didn't I? There are downstream tests, which are mentioned in changelog. I am pretty sure upstream tests only cover part of the whole networking code, if you really want to apply the rule, a lot of code are already dead. Once again, I don't see any reason why you only treat netdevsim differently. ;) > > > But this does remind me of using netdevsim for tc-testing. > > Please bring the code back as part of the series adding upstream tests. Please remove all those not covered by upstream tests just to be fair?? Thank you!