* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-26 9:36 ` [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...) Paolo Abeni
@ 2021-03-26 10:22 ` Norman Maurer
2021-03-26 12:22 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-26 10:25 ` Norman Maurer
2021-03-26 10:38 ` Norman Maurer
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Norman Maurer @ 2021-03-26 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Abeni; +Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, davem, dsahern
Hi,
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> From: Norman Maurer <norman_maurer@apple.com>
>>
>> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
>> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
>> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
>> case for UDP_GRO
>>
>> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
>> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer <norman_maurer@apple.com>
>
> The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
> a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Noted for the next time…
>
> Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
> patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
>
Ok noted
> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me some pointers I am happy to do so.
>
> Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
> getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
> the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
> opinion.
I see… For me it seemed more like a bug as I can’t think of a reason why only setsockopt should be supported for an option but not getsockopt. But it may be just my opinion :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks
Norman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-26 10:22 ` Norman Maurer
@ 2021-03-26 12:22 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-31 13:10 ` Norman Maurer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Paolo Abeni @ 2021-03-26 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Norman Maurer; +Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, davem, dsahern
On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 11:22 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
> > One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> > a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
>
> I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure
> how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me
> some pointers I am happy to do so.
Well, I actually gave you a bad advice about fiddling with patchwork.
The autoritative documentation:
Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
(inside the kernel tree) suggests to avoid it.
Just posting a v2 will suffice.
Thanks!
Paolo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-26 12:22 ` Paolo Abeni
@ 2021-03-31 13:10 ` Norman Maurer
2021-03-31 13:18 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-04-01 0:18 ` David Ahern
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Norman Maurer @ 2021-03-31 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Abeni, netdev, linux-kernel, dsahern, davem
Friendly ping…
As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original commit I do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as well. That’s also the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the commit message / subject for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug and not a new feature.
Thanks
Norman
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 13:22, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 11:22 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
>>> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
>>
>> I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure
>> how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me
>> some pointers I am happy to do so.
>
> Well, I actually gave you a bad advice about fiddling with patchwork.
>
> The autoritative documentation:
>
> Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
>
> (inside the kernel tree) suggests to avoid it.
>
> Just posting a v2 will suffice.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Paolo
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-31 13:10 ` Norman Maurer
@ 2021-03-31 13:18 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-04-01 0:18 ` David Ahern
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Paolo Abeni @ 2021-03-31 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Norman Maurer, netdev, linux-kernel, dsahern, davem
On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 15:10 +0200, Norman Maurer wrote:
> As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original
> commit I do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as
> well. That’s also the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the
> commit message / subject for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug
> and not a new feature.
I have no strong opinion against that (sorry, I hoped that was clear in
my reply).
Please go ahead.
Thanks,
Paolo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-31 13:10 ` Norman Maurer
2021-03-31 13:18 ` Paolo Abeni
@ 2021-04-01 0:18 ` David Ahern
2021-04-01 7:01 ` Norman Maurer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: David Ahern @ 2021-04-01 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Norman Maurer, Paolo Abeni, netdev, linux-kernel, dsahern, davem
On 3/31/21 7:10 AM, Norman Maurer wrote:
> Friendly ping…
>
> As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original commit I do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as well. That’s also the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the commit message / subject for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug and not a new feature.
>
>
I agree that it should be added to net
If you do not see it here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
you need to re-send and clearly mark it as [PATCH net]. Make sure it has
a Fixes tag.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-04-01 0:18 ` David Ahern
@ 2021-04-01 7:01 ` Norman Maurer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Norman Maurer @ 2021-04-01 7:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Ahern; +Cc: Paolo Abeni, netdev, linux-kernel, dsahern, davem
> On 1. Apr 2021, at 02:18, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/31/21 7:10 AM, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> Friendly ping…
>>
>> As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original commit I do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as well. That’s also the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the commit message / subject for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug and not a new feature.
>>
>>
>
> I agree that it should be added to net
>
> If you do not see it here:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
>
> you need to re-send and clearly mark it as [PATCH net]. Make sure it has
> a Fixes tag.
>
Done: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20210401065917.78025-1-norman_maurer@apple.com/
Thanks a lot of the review and help.
Bye
Norman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-26 9:36 ` [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...) Paolo Abeni
2021-03-26 10:22 ` Norman Maurer
@ 2021-03-26 10:25 ` Norman Maurer
2021-03-26 10:38 ` Norman Maurer
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Norman Maurer @ 2021-03-26 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Abeni; +Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, davem, dsahern
Hi,
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> From: Norman Maurer <norman_maurer@apple.com>
>>
>> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
>> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
>> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
>> case for UDP_GRO
>>
>> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
>> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer <norman_maurer@apple.com>
>
> The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
> a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Noted for the next time…
>
> Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
> patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
>
Ok noted
> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me some pointers I am happy to do so.
>
> Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
> getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
> the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
> opinion.
I see… For me it seemed more like a bug as I can’t think of a reason why only setsockopt should be supported for an option but not getsockopt. But it may be just my opinion :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks
Norman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
2021-03-26 9:36 ` [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...) Paolo Abeni
2021-03-26 10:22 ` Norman Maurer
2021-03-26 10:25 ` Norman Maurer
@ 2021-03-26 10:38 ` Norman Maurer
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Norman Maurer @ 2021-03-26 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Abeni; +Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, davem, dsahern
Hi,
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> From: Norman Maurer <norman_maurer@apple.com>
>>
>> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
>> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
>> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
>> case for UDP_GRO
>>
>> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
>> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer <norman_maurer@apple.com>
>
> The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
> a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Noted for the next time…
>
> Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
> patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
>
Ok noted
> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me some pointers I am happy to do so.
>
> Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
> getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
> the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
> opinion.
I see… For me it seemed more like a bug as I can’t think of a reason why only setsockopt should be supported for an option but not getsockopt. But it may be just my opinion :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks
Norman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread