Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Mon, 8 Mar 2021 16:28:58 -0800 Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > > Hello, > > > > We plan to refactor the iavf module and would appreciate community and > > maintainer feedback on our plans. We want to do this to realize the > > usefulness of the common code module for multiple drivers. This > > proposal aims to avoid disrupting current users. > > > > The steps we plan are something like: > > 1) Continue upstreaming of the iecm module (common module) and > > the initial feature set for the idpf driver[1] utilizing iecm. > > Oh, that's still going? there wasn't any revision for such a long time > I deleted my notes :-o
Argh! sorry about the delay. These proposed driver changes impacted progress on this patch series, we should have done a better job communicating what was going on. > > We are looking to make sure that the mode of our refactoring will meet > > the community's expectations. Any advice or feedback is appreciated. > > Sounds like a slow, drawn out process painful to everyone involved. > > The driver is upstream. My humble preference is that Intel sends small > logical changes we can review, and preserve a meaningful git history. We are attempting to make it as painless and quick as possible. With that said, I see your point and am driving some internal discussions to see what we can do differently. The primary reason for the plan proposed is the code reuse model we've chosen. With the change to the common module, the new iavf is significantly different and replacing the old avf base with the new would take many unnecessary intermediate steps that would be thrown away at the end. The end design will use the code from the common module with hooks to get device specific implementation where necessary. After putting in place the new-avf code we can update the iavf with new functionality which is already present in the common module. Thanks, Jesse
