how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Stefano Brivio]

Hi,

As I'm currently preparing another fix for i40e, and the last one I
submitted has been stuck for about two weeks now, I would like to ask
some details about the process to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf drivers,
before I do something wrong again.

Do all the patches have to go through Intel's patchwork, no matter
what's the perceived severity of the issue? Should I still submit them
to netdev anyway?

Which trees should I check before submitting a patch? Is it enough to
check the master branch of jkirsher/net-queue.git and
jkirsher/next-queue.git?

Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?

I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
for.

Any answer is appreciated. Thanks,

[Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Stefano Brivio]

Hi,

As I'm currently preparing another fix for i40e, and the last one I
submitted has been stuck for about two weeks now, I would like to ask
some details about the process to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf drivers,
before I do something wrong again.

Do all the patches have to go through Intel's patchwork, no matter
what's the perceived severity of the issue? Should I still submit them
to netdev anyway?

Which trees should I check before submitting a patch? Is it enough to
check the master branch of jkirsher/net-queue.git and
jkirsher/next-queue.git?

Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?

I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
for.

Any answer is appreciated. Thanks,

--
Stefano

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Alexander Duyck]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I'm currently preparing another fix for i40e, and the last one I
> submitted has been stuck for about two weeks now, I would like to ask
> some details about the process to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf drivers,
> before I do something wrong again.
>
> Do all the patches have to go through Intel's patchwork, no matter
> what's the perceived severity of the issue? Should I still submit them
> to netdev anyway?

It is preferred if they go through Intel's patchwork as they should go
through some additional testing and review that way.

> Which trees should I check before submitting a patch? Is it enough to
> check the master branch of jkirsher/net-queue.git and
> jkirsher/next-queue.git?

It depends on if you want to see the patches end up in Dave's net tree
or his net-next tree. If the fix is high enough priority to be
accepted into Dave's net tree then you can submit it against Jeff's
net-queue, otherwise it should be the next-queue. You might want to
check the next-queue for a fix if you are seeing an issue though, as
there is a chance of a fix for an issue you deem critical ending up
there if somebody else judged it differently.

> Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
> kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?

Once in the patchwork they go through testing and after they have
passed testing Jeff will try to push them to Dave.

> I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
> but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
> waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
> happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
> for.

Well in the case of your patch it was rejected as it didn't apply to
Jeff's tree and conflicted with Jacob Keller's patch. He submitted a
v2 on Tuesday which has only been applied for a few days. Once it
receives a "Tested-by:" it will be ready for submission assuming it
passes testing.

> Any answer is appreciated. Thanks,
>
> --
> Stefano

I hope that helps to clarify things.

- Alex

[Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Alexander Duyck]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I'm currently preparing another fix for i40e, and the last one I
> submitted has been stuck for about two weeks now, I would like to ask
> some details about the process to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf drivers,
> before I do something wrong again.
>
> Do all the patches have to go through Intel's patchwork, no matter
> what's the perceived severity of the issue? Should I still submit them
> to netdev anyway?

It is preferred if they go through Intel's patchwork as they should go
through some additional testing and review that way.

> Which trees should I check before submitting a patch? Is it enough to
> check the master branch of jkirsher/net-queue.git and
> jkirsher/next-queue.git?

It depends on if you want to see the patches end up in Dave's net tree
or his net-next tree. If the fix is high enough priority to be
accepted into Dave's net tree then you can submit it against Jeff's
net-queue, otherwise it should be the next-queue. You might want to
check the next-queue for a fix if you are seeing an issue though, as
there is a chance of a fix for an issue you deem critical ending up
there if somebody else judged it differently.

> Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
> kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?

Once in the patchwork they go through testing and after they have
passed testing Jeff will try to push them to Dave.

> I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
> but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
> waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
> happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
> for.

Well in the case of your patch it was rejected as it didn't apply to
Jeff's tree and conflicted with Jacob Keller's patch. He submitted a
v2 on Tuesday which has only been applied for a few days. Once it
receives a "Tested-by:" it will be ready for submission assuming it
passes testing.

> Any answer is appreciated. Thanks,
>
> --
> Stefano

I hope that helps to clarify things.

- Alex

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Stefano Brivio]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 15:10:08 -0700
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
> > kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?  
> 
> Once in the patchwork they go through testing and after they have
> passed testing Jeff will try to push them to Dave.

Ok, the whole part above is clear, thanks a lot for clarifying.

> > I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
> > but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
> > waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
> > happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
> > for.  
> 
> Well in the case of your patch it was rejected as it didn't apply to
> Jeff's tree

It actually did when I posted it.

> and conflicted with Jacob Keller's patch. He submitted a v2 on Tuesday
> which has only been applied for a few days. Once it receives a
> "Tested-by:"

Which, if I understood correctly, only comes after some internal testing
process, right?

> it will be ready for submission assuming it passes testing.

Now that patch is again in a v2 pull request for net-next, without the
changes I suggested for the commit message. And the same exact code
changes were around for two weeks. IMHO there's room for improvement,
so to speak.

> I hope that helps to clarify things.

It did to some extent, and thanks again for that.

[Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Stefano Brivio]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 15:10:08 -0700
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
> > kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?  
> 
> Once in the patchwork they go through testing and after they have
> passed testing Jeff will try to push them to Dave.

Ok, the whole part above is clear, thanks a lot for clarifying.

> > I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
> > but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
> > waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
> > happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
> > for.  
> 
> Well in the case of your patch it was rejected as it didn't apply to
> Jeff's tree

It actually did when I posted it.

> and conflicted with Jacob Keller's patch. He submitted a v2 on Tuesday
> which has only been applied for a few days. Once it receives a
> "Tested-by:"

Which, if I understood correctly, only comes after some internal testing
process, right?

> it will be ready for submission assuming it passes testing.

Now that patch is again in a v2 pull request for net-next, without the
changes I suggested for the commit message. And the same exact code
changes were around for two weeks. IMHO there's room for improvement,
so to speak.

> I hope that helps to clarify things.

It did to some extent, and thanks again for that.


--
Stefano

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Alexander Duyck]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 15:10:08 -0700
> Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
>> > kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?
>>
>> Once in the patchwork they go through testing and after they have
>> passed testing Jeff will try to push them to Dave.
>
> Ok, the whole part above is clear, thanks a lot for clarifying.
>
>> > I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
>> > but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
>> > waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
>> > happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
>> > for.
>>
>> Well in the case of your patch it was rejected as it didn't apply to
>> Jeff's tree
>
> It actually did when I posted it.
>
>> and conflicted with Jacob Keller's patch. He submitted a v2 on Tuesday
>> which has only been applied for a few days. Once it receives a
>> "Tested-by:"
>
> Which, if I understood correctly, only comes after some internal testing
> process, right?
>
>> it will be ready for submission assuming it passes testing.
>
> Now that patch is again in a v2 pull request for net-next, without the
> changes I suggested for the commit message. And the same exact code
> changes were around for two weeks. IMHO there's room for improvement,
> so to speak.
>
>> I hope that helps to clarify things.
>
> It did to some extent, and thanks again for that.

One other thing I forgot that adds to the confusion is that you will
probably want to base you patch on the dev-queue branch of those
trees, not the master branch. The master branch is what Jeff submits
to Dave if I am not mistaken, while dev-queue is the location for the
ongoing development.

- Alex

[Intel-wired-lan] how to submit fixes for i40e/i40evf?

[Alexander Duyck]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 15:10:08 -0700
> Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > Once patches reach Intel's patchwork, will they need to wait for some
>> > kind of periodically scheduled pull request process?
>>
>> Once in the patchwork they go through testing and after they have
>> passed testing Jeff will try to push them to Dave.
>
> Ok, the whole part above is clear, thanks a lot for clarifying.
>
>> > I don't know if a process is actually defined at this level of detail,
>> > but still I feel it's wrong that an obvious fix for a potential crash is
>> > waiting in some sort of limbo for 10 days now. Sure, worse things
>> > happen in the world, but I can't understand what this patch is waiting
>> > for.
>>
>> Well in the case of your patch it was rejected as it didn't apply to
>> Jeff's tree
>
> It actually did when I posted it.
>
>> and conflicted with Jacob Keller's patch. He submitted a v2 on Tuesday
>> which has only been applied for a few days. Once it receives a
>> "Tested-by:"
>
> Which, if I understood correctly, only comes after some internal testing
> process, right?
>
>> it will be ready for submission assuming it passes testing.
>
> Now that patch is again in a v2 pull request for net-next, without the
> changes I suggested for the commit message. And the same exact code
> changes were around for two weeks. IMHO there's room for improvement,
> so to speak.
>
>> I hope that helps to clarify things.
>
> It did to some extent, and thanks again for that.

One other thing I forgot that adds to the confusion is that you will
probably want to base you patch on the dev-queue branch of those
trees, not the master branch. The master branch is what Jeff submits
to Dave if I am not mistaken, while dev-queue is the location for the
ongoing development.

- Alex