From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6FC3C433E3 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 03:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 822B220787 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 03:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="IInjob76" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728082AbgGPDEb (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:04:31 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:49507 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727034AbgGPDEb (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:04:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594868670; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=u3cJpUTzqg4XsvEigkP0qRKjmpXxEBPnj3YxAag4kA8=; b=IInjob76lLvJlsaEAu2G8J8eVYUFOZm8bDkmGOVPRURNoVoasGT0/4F5XYu6l/Igsxpngx 4ZSF4kqiz0mXm8qfTgBDHN6Y6VnyX7ZrAEYJSSL9N+bCdWbCuKtNBRymmQYPOCZ1fRrla8 ybA+pADt9GEKKUwpT+rv+JCCegF4JoU= Received: from mail-ot1-f69.google.com (mail-ot1-f69.google.com [209.85.210.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-151-uOrmqPp_NIqU0AUyoNyISQ-1; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:04:28 -0400 X-MC-Unique: uOrmqPp_NIqU0AUyoNyISQ-1 Received: by mail-ot1-f69.google.com with SMTP id 10so1992428otp.20 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:04:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u3cJpUTzqg4XsvEigkP0qRKjmpXxEBPnj3YxAag4kA8=; b=fRkbPLj6i68I7fpLiSAMLP0UxeHaZr2Ri8no0EUfDTpqeDnxOjtGl7SFdbwhNlix/m iJT16Jy8WLSn+nQnOvPMcfQYWxf9RsPj2fK6ES4/O9hXSWiJYdsHHd47bmBod39NAC2z 6HPifnos1sGfkGVI3C8FHuefGPSGFvMrgrvX2QrVjHBv5LewVq7SIht8slMrqpafv191 xQxnHHYjv/micoSB1R6uRg4ggbuWrrgfXw2sAvFRPrn5OWgKvhS9ld7QlHsvcNIbIth+ 8j9grZOTJLMvpRMMlWYITORrKkwd7p9vUd6LXC7fQSalK2lE4aJ5EIE957al7q1Auktq 7Mdw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5333qzaButOVPXbw/rSP8hdYC5YTIhI9XSU1Yq+eAg6NXaDzfD97 4oKjzqrSqKC13xsRYqa+vDkL6QjfvBjnvh2wrEJ9YLVqYPm+Is6gLZZCdhPzrmLzwDOT2A4LRtp DGefC9SJm3p3/fgly5XRCxoK7HzlVCnDo X-Received: by 2002:aca:ecc7:: with SMTP id k190mr2276114oih.92.1594868667432; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:04:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyVFY9rpnyGirb4EfBOCbtJU0RrgfyKdCwmYw8wx20p10MV5trASOJ1b7kYhaS7omzicZKghG1A2DDyhyZ+u7M= X-Received: by 2002:aca:ecc7:: with SMTP id k190mr2276101oih.92.1594868667181; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:04:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200713220016.xy4n7c5uu3xs6dyk@lion.mk-sys.cz> <20200713154118.3a1edd66@hermes.lan> <20200714002609.GB1140268@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20200714002609.GB1140268@lunn.ch> From: Jarod Wilson Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:04:16 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Netdev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 8:26 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Hi Jarod > > Do you have this change scripted? Could you apply the script to v5.4 > and then cherry-pick the 8 bonding fixes that exist in v5.4.51. How > many result in conflicts? > > Could you do the same with v4.19...v4.19.132, which has 20 fixes. > > This will give us an idea of the maintenance overhead such a change is > going to cause, and how good git is at figuring out this sort of > thing. Okay, I have some fugly bash scripts that use sed to do the majority of the work here, save some manual bits done to add duplicate interfaces w/new names and some aliases, and everything is compiling and functions in a basic smoke test here. Summary on the 5.4 git cherry-pick conflict resolution after applying changes: not that good. 7 of the 8 bonding fixes in the 5.4 stable branch required fixing when straight cherry-picking. Dumping the patches, running a sed script over them, and then git am'ing them works pretty well though. I didn't try 4.19 (yet?), I assume it'll just be more of the same. -- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com