On 01/17/2018 01:08 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Hey David, and others, [+Alexei] > > On 01/17/2018 12:27 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On 18-01-16 05:41 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:57 -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>>> On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote: >>>> >>>> [..] >>>> >>>> I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches >>>> and then yours: >>>> Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack >>>> for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific >>>> use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned >>>> with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's >>>> patches) >>> >>> Our patches are concerned with propagating the extack to drivers, >>> and nfp (and netdevsim) make use of it. >>> >>> I'm miffed by the fact that you jumped out with this conflicting series >>> *after* we posted ours, and we got shot down on white space. > > So I've been looking over Quentin's series just now that sits in my > bucket and it looks fine to me, but merge with this one would probably > end up badly for David. Therefore I'm proposing the following that > should hopefully be fine and work out for Alexander and Jakub/Quentin > as a consensus: > > I'm getting the current bpf-next stuff as PR out in a few minutes, so > David can pull this in and therefore net-next will also have the > dependency on nfp for Quentin's series. Then, given this one here > needs another respin anyway, I would suggest to combine the missing > patches from Alexander's series, and get it all out in a single patch > series directly for net-next w/o any interdependency hassle.
Ok, bpf-next PR with the nfp dependencies is now out, so all this can make progress here. I've therefore purged Jakub's extack series from bpf queue, so a combined series can target net-next directly then. Thanks, Daniel
