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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6AA5C433EF for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F6EF60F9B for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:19:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 4F6EF60F9B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:49706 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mfdE5-0007qK-72 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 03:19:57 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46080) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mfdDQ-00071H-83 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 03:19:16 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:56289) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mfdDN-0006LS-Iy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 03:19:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1635319152; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=CgkPhLjzffZHQ7xjdCwjF4BqYArCwLq2vDkhi+oZOww=; b=NUVGYbC7vRK3cY+UiV/Xav2KcY6B1BLiE/zqTNBvzJMLitaivVgRTeIFqx9rem6K4qkg+b l/pAPVhGOXnQUHW3J2QxjcwxMxdJaWY6qdQm7lEhcrGu+E2FVaFvOlwXCfvaxmi+gIbRXb 9nmEvDP8SxU6dJk8uu5byW/eHhF/A9I= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-485-RBBLUJixPAOURM7Qijjf3g-1; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 03:19:10 -0400 X-MC-Unique: RBBLUJixPAOURM7Qijjf3g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74CC61018720; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:19:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-112-7.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.7]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C98419D9D; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:19:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8CB8A11380A7; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:19:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: Jason Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] net/filter: Remove vnet_hdr from filter-mirror and filter-redirector References: <20211026181730.3102184-1-chen.zhang@intel.com> <20211026181730.3102184-2-chen.zhang@intel.com> <8948cdd0-7f4c-9b77-a02f-582b4fe96adf@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:19:07 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Jason Wang's message of "Wed, 27 Oct 2021 14:45:28 +0800") Message-ID: <87ee87aqac.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=armbru@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Zhang, Chen" , qemu-dev , Li Zhijian Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Jason Wang writes: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 2:40 PM Zhang, Chen wrote: [...] >> > >> I wonder if we break management layer. If yes, maybe it's better to >> > >> keep the vnet_hdr_support here. >> > > >> > > Yes and no, With this series of patches, filters have ability to automatically >> > > Configure the appropriate vnet_hdr_support flag according to the current environment. >> > > And can report error when can't fixing the vnet_hdr(The user cannot fix it from the previous way ). >> > > So I think no need for the user to configure this option, some relevant background knowledge required. >> > > >> > > For the management layer, keep the vnet_hdr_support may be meaningless except for compatibility. >> > > In this situation, Do you think we still need to keep the vnet_hdr_support for management layer? >> > >> > >> > So it depends on whether management layer like libvirt has already >> > supported this. If yes, we may get errors using new qemu with old libvirt? >> >> As far as I know, Current management layer like upstream libvirt is no COLO official support yet. >> And some real CSPs use libvirt passthrough qmp command to Qemu for manage COLO VM. > > So the question still, it looks to me it requires the modification of > the layers on top of libvirt? If the answer is yes, we'd better keep > that compatibility. When in doubt, maintain compatibility. We may want to deprecate parameters that have become unnecessary. [...]