From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cong Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/6] net_sched: remove get_stats from tc_action_ops Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 10:38:58 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1386913673-8210-1-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> <1386913673-8210-2-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> <52AAF7FD.3090207@mojatatu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers , "David S. Miller" To: Jamal Hadi Salim Return-path: Received: from mail-oa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.219.51]:38697 "EHLO mail-oa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753221Ab3LMSi7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:38:59 -0500 Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id i7so2522370oag.10 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 10:38:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52AAF7FD.3090207@mojatatu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > > So where is you 0/6? ;-> It is there, just without any CC. :-) > General: The spirit of the patches i find agreeable. > I am against patch 1. Dont just remove ABI/APIs that exist. I don't think we care about kernel module ABI in upstream, nor we need to care about any out-of-tree module. Otherwise they are already broken by any change of sk_buff, right? > Some of these changes are substantial - did you do any testing? > If you havent I can help - but at minimal i will ask you do so. > I will also do more review then with whatever iteration you have around > sunday. I have other patches i meant to submit - but i will do them on > top of yours. > Yes, but I just have testcase for u32 filter and basic filter with mirred action. I don't have time to write testcases for other things yet. Thanks!