Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling

[Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 7:09 PM
> To: Gaëtan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
> stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] net/failsafe: fix removed device handling
> 
> 13/12/2017 17:09, Gaëtan Rivet:
> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 03:48:46PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > > From: Gaëtan Rivet [mailto:gaetan.rivet@6wind.com]
> > > > > Fixes: a46f8d5 ("net/failsafe: add fail-safe PMD")
> > > > > Fixes: b737a1e ("net/failsafe: support flow API")
> > > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This patch is not a fix.
> > > > It relies on an eth_dev API evolution. Without this evolution,
> > > > this patch is meaningless and would break compilation if backported in
> stable branch.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is a fix because the bug is finally solved by this patch.
> > > I agree that it cannot be backported itself, but maybe all the series should
> be backported.
> > > Other idea:
> > > Add new patch which documents the bug and backport it.
> > > Remove it in this patch and remove cc stable from it.
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> >
> > I think you could write a crude version that would not rely on the
> > ethdev evolution (checking sdev->remove only), which would be
> > incomplete but still better than nothing.
> > And why not in this patch document the issue.
> > Without any dependency outside failsafe, this could be backported.
> >
> > Then complete the fix with the API evolution if the new devops is
> > accepted.
> 
> I think it is not worth the effort.
> It is a limitation in earlier releases and will be properly fixed with the new op.
> Please just remove the Cc:stable@dpdk.org.

OK.