From: Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:58:56 -0800
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> From: Michael Chan <michael.c...@broadcom.com> >> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:13:47 -0800 >> >>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> Please _DO NOT_ guard XDP support with an ifdef the user >>>> can modify. >>>> >>>> Treat it like any other common netdev feature a driver might >>>> support such as checksum offloading or GRO. >>>> >>> >>> David, I want to make sure I understand completely. Are you saying >>> don't use Kconfig option for XDP? Have it always available? >> >> Yes. >> >> I don't see a similar config option used in any other driver. >> >> What's really driving me completely mad about driver XDP adoption >> is that there is so much inconsistency. >> >> If you do not see another XDP supporting driver do something, don't be >> tempted to blaze your own trail and handle something in a unique way. >> >> We don't set precedence by one driver saying "hey it's better to do >> things this way, forget what all the other drivers are doing." Rather >> we have a "discussion" about what the appropriate thing is to do and >> convert all the drivers only after a decision has been made. >> >> Meanwhile we keep the status quo. > > I am working on some API changes that will hopefully get a little > consistency across these drivers (this includes feature flag > NETIF_F_XDP). This will reduce code some and should be good cleanup, > but XDP is currently very intertwined with the critical data path so > we might need to be looking at this for a while. There's now more > drivers with XDP support than when I started this work, so I don't > think bnxt should wait for this cleanup-- it's just one more driver > we'll have to retrofit. Of course. Michael just respin with the Kconfig change and I'll apply your series. In fact I was about to until I noticed the XDP Kconfig knob :)
