Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] ethernet: Convert from tasklet to BH workqueue

[Allen <allen.lkml@gmail.com>]

> > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 07:01:11PM +0000, Allen Pais wrote:
> > > > The only generic interface to execute asynchronously in the BH context is
> > > > tasklet; however, it's marked deprecated and has some design flaws. To
> > > > replace tasklets, BH workqueue support was recently added. A BH workqueue
> > > > behaves similarly to regular workqueues except that the queued work items
> > > > are executed in the BH context.
> > > >
> > > > This patch converts drivers/ethernet/* from tasklet to BH workqueue.
> > >
> > > I doubt you're going to get many comments on this patch, being so large
> > > and spread across all drivers. I'm not going to bother trying to edit
> > > this down to something more sensible, I'll just plonk my comment here.
> > >
> > > For the mvpp2 driver, you're only updating a comment - and looking at
> > > it, the comment no longer reflects the code. It doesn't make use of
> > > tasklets at all. That makes the comment wrong whether or not it's
> > > updated. So I suggest rather than doing a search and replace for
> > > "tasklet" to "BH blahblah" (sorry, I don't remember what you replaced
> > > it with) just get rid of that bit of the comment.
> > >
> >
> >  Thank you Russell.
> >
> >  I will get rid of the comment. If it helps, I can create a patch for each
> > driver. We did that in the past, with this series, I thought it would be
> > easier to apply one patch.
>
> Hi Allen and Russell,
>
> My 2c worth:
>
> * In general non bug-fix patches for networking code should be targeted at
>   net-next. This means that they should include net-next in the subject,
>   and be based on that tree.
>
>   Subject: [PATCH net-next] ...
>
> * This series does not appear to apply to net-next
>
> * This series appears to depend on code which is not present in net-next.
>   f.e. disable_work_sync
>
> * The Infiniband patches should probably be submitted separately
>   to the relevant maintainers
>
> * As this patch seems to involve many non-trivial changes
>   it seems to me that it would be best to break it up somehow.
>   To allow proper review.
>
> * Patch-sets for net-next should be limited to 15 patches,
>   so perhaps multiple sequential batches would be a way forwards.
>
> Link: https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html

 Thank you very much for taking the time to write back.
Since the patches that are necessary for this series are not in
net-next, I could not target net-next.

 I will wait for the patches to land in net-next, and the v2 will
be broken into multiple smaller sets(per driver).

Thanks.
 Allen