From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3116CA034F; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:25:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60A640040; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:25:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19584003D; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:25:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E35111615; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 08:25:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 Mar 2021 08:25:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm3; bh= wF0LFrWkF8fwOe+g6bWCIOqOCiFhG9PlMR1BR2t1JQI=; b=jT4aRXydF7E5xzKP QLeoT78bSFMYhgYghHugtvSUPt4+sJwOvXiJ9GlmU5YXuYuhkl6xkIWCVn8Y24YN m/8GljlE9DNGUgXVMl3Tt5AfmaV/vrf8geD9wNCzKBuISE6/i3T8GsO7hCgMGkPR iPGPLurziSF3YNaEms7MTzCpW2g7N6abGiOyLUqPn3tR1IGyJtbV8NXbW4j2yM4+ E4Ga0Syd9pi7+Xx+ZEbtd6FGKS4zD3qAp6ZZ6trKT4MhPVj+DEnwF5Pj38/cBdKC ltXtzFO/utneVhWFZ75AVoILbRTB5ppEKEhX86xqC8h4ya94qzdBJpKsnnAuU6b5 FXSo6g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=wF0LFrWkF8fwOe+g6bWCIOqOCiFhG9PlMR1BR2t1J QI=; b=uwBJHyCaq+CTuMunyah6/4XjgitIinmYmdfPM68yv4ZibilwRfpGLZdf8 eh1qGPv36CBALnJuiPeshCTFmwnyMag09MmIHGOv6QlRz2daKfyQJtNV+KiDY/y/ ZyaM4MaY7GkEGM+uXgCh+Y75McWDUxAFvEWZEIfwVgOBxcfK2ZCpscNu5biZ2T/B PJ7Ih25cpG2pvlgI8WcyiQlkjWLayUIQex/pfdIdVlIAufFsrCJsf1QxGCVas341 JLGGnyQmUIctx8To67AS3TdotRJA/WI48OpXl2Hyats9TWaTI4En7WbfqGxPUtq7 LdGvs2aVZ5fyg7zZ2Q1yJQOGnmUkQ== X-ME-Sender: <xms:wIxYYNXyKgdZsq-BZxyzPVG6J2bMIxW_7Sx3YheRAVV-OCiAmSmWrQ> <xme:wIxYYNhDRp6dIFTu0NJBR3NSypwxloRuxgBuWkOxO8e5m8sSiQyxohJ1colzZ60HI brSMRKyoOmEXgyzGA> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudeggedgfeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtqhertddttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepteelhedtheetkeelteduhfdutedvgfdukefhfffgffetvdetvefg leejteetffefnecuffhomhgrihhnpehoiihlrggsshdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufe egrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghi lhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:wIxYYGToIwEgbaMQdMqfWZu5YCkPYa1JhU1hF-qVhtHqcpEPNlgxFw> <xmx:wIxYYIG37nRHGLfiKWwNC1It8VNWq1JUn-_HmA-K0hmOqrXaUj67bg> <xmx:wIxYYGkRbVqFSiNRUe9JoJFflESXfEZGQrcQ0ePhW582yR6AODexTA> <xmx:wYxYYEo5M9x-giGQIpqUwVNKzn-68yFhnXG7Cx3wDIID04YnLjwyAw> Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1153F1080067; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 08:25:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> Cc: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>, "Pai G, Sunil" <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>, Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org>, "Stokes, Ian" <ian.stokes@intel.com>, "Govindharajan, Hariprasad" <hariprasad.govindharajan@intel.com>, "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>, James Page <james.page@canonical.com> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:25:33 +0100 Message-ID: <11715925.4IKFeQ5fnV@thomas> In-Reply-To: <7eb39330834de50d2f3ee603adcd7f5501be9a83.camel@debian.org> References: <20200818181222.8462-1-bluca@debian.org> <20210322114101.GB1440@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <7eb39330834de50d2f3ee603adcd7f5501be9a83.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] 19.11.4 patches review and test X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> 22/03/2021 12:59, Luca Boccassi: > On Mon, 2021-03-22 at 11:41 +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:49:54AM +0100, Christian Ehrhardt wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 7:25 PM Pai G, Sunil <sunil.pai.g@intel.com> = wrote: > > > > Hi Christian, Ilya > > > > From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> > > > > > On 3/18/21 2:36 PM, Pai G, Sunil wrote: > > > > > > Hey Christian, > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > <snipped> > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > back in 19.11.4 these DPDK changes were not picked up as the= y have > > > > > > > broken builds as discussed here. > > > > > > > Later on the communication was that all this works fine now a= nd > > > > > > > thereby Luca has "reverted the reverts" in 19.11.6 [1]. > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > But today we were made aware that still no OVS 2.13 builds ag= ainst a > > > > > > > DPDK that has those changes. > > > > > > > Not 2.13.1 as we have it in Ubuntu nor (if it needs some OVS = changes > > > > > > > backported) the recent 2.13.3 does build. > > > > > > > They still fail with the very same issue I reported [2] back = then. > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > Unfortunately I have just released 19.11.7 so I can't revert = them > > > > > > > there - but OTOH reverting and counter reverting every other = release > > > > > > > seems wrong anyway. > > > > >=20 > > > > > It is wrong indeed, but the main question here is why these patch= es was > > > > > backported to stable release in a first place? > > > > >=20 > > > > > Looking at these patches, they are not actual bug fixes but more = like "nice to > > > > > have" features that additionally breaks the way application links= with DPDK. > > > > > Stuff like that should not be acceptable to the stable release wi= thout a strong > > > > > justification or, at least, testing with actual applications. > > >=20 > > > I agree, but TBH IIRC these changes were initially by OVS people :-) > > > One could chase down the old talks between Luca and the requesters, b= ut I don't > > > think that gains us that much. > > >=20 > > > > > Since we already have a revert of revert, revert of revert of rev= ert doesn't > > > > > seem so bad. > > >=20 > > > As long as we don't extend this series, yeah > > >=20 > > > > > > > I wanted to ask if there is a set of patches that OVS would n= eed to > > > > > > > backport to 2.13.x to make this work? > > > > > > > If they could be identified and prepared Distros could use th= em on > > > > > > > 2.13.3 asap and 2.13.4 could officially release them for OVS = later on. > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > But for that we'd need a hint which OVS changes that would ne= ed to be. > > > > > > > All I know atm is from the testing reports on DPDK it seems t= hat OVS > > > > > > > 2.14.3 and 2.15 are happy with the new DPDK code. > > > > > > > Do you have pointers on what 2.13.3 would need to get backpor= ted to > > > > > > > work again in regard to this build issue. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > You would need to use partial contents from patch : > > > > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/160814236= 5- > > > > > 26215 > > > > > > -1-git-send-email-ian.stokes@intel.com/ > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > If you'd like me to send patches which would work with 2.13, 2.= 14, I'm > > > > > > ok with that too.[keeping only those parts from patch which fix= es the issue > > > > > you see.] But we must ensure it doesn=E2=80=99t cause problems fo= r OVS too. > > > > > > Your thoughts Ilya ? > > > > >=20 > > > > > We had more fixes on top of this particular patch and I'd like to= not cherry- > > > > > pick and re-check all of this again. > > > >=20 > > > > I agree, we had more fixes on top of this. It would be risky to che= rry-pick. > > > > So it might be a better option to revert. > > >=20 > > > I agree, as far as I assessed the situation it would mean the revert > > > of the following list. > > > And since that is a lot of "reverts" in the string, to be clear it me= ans that > > > those original changes would not be present anymore in 19.11.x. > > >=20 > > > f49248a990 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: prevent overlinking"" > > > 39586a4cf0 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: improve static linking f= lags"" > > > 906e935a1f Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: output drivers first for > > > static build"" > > > deebf95239 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: move pkg-config file cre= ation"" > > > a3bd9a34bf Revert "Revert "build: always link whole DPDK static libra= ries"" > > > d4bc124438 Revert "Revert "devtools: test static linkage with pkg-con= fig"" > > >=20 > > > But to avoid going back&forth I'd prefer to have a signed-off on that > > > approach from: > > > - Luca (for 19.11.6 which has added the changes) > > > - Bruce (for being involved in the old&new case in general) > > > - Thomas (for general master maintainer thoughts) > > >=20 > >=20 > > If this is what is needed to ensure OVS can continue to use this release > > series, then I am absolutely fine with it. >=20 > This was requested by OVS, so if they don't need it anymore it's fine > by me as well I am not sure to understand the full story, but I am a bit worried that our release is dictated by a single "user" (project using DPDK). Please do you have links of discussion history?