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 64ADDA034F; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:59:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E927E40040; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:59:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wm1-f50.google.com (mail-wm1-f50.google.com [209.85.128.50]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A42D14003D; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:59:27 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-f50.google.com with SMTP id n11-20020a05600c4f8bb029010e5cf86347so11059255wmq.1; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 04:59:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:content-transfer-encoding:user-agent:mime-version; bh=rTgH94AHjlKaJ/VaAthZTujVUI5YWe+MMBWFP+CtKuQ=; b=dQEpD4c96EoEs9v52cj1UuT+/9Pmhxpcncu4d25dlx7ZUqaC9iAIUMXi0BYUUUI1EN ZzHkc2DGpq80DbFScFuAfedFZHVWhekKb3ILdMhrjSLtEJG+oLhijWHQQ45mJEJfJ1kP 1+XlU9XqoFZmI4coo/MXjaPzaSNIzp/fq0P6tLRIaauDIw3dpNXEwi6bUprLGq+1N8lE 9nyUm/HRNbBZ7NEiVV+E5UzKUM/FZNadpcn75W88RtcjYCF1BCWeJ2xEYRF2JGu0L+SY Zx3T1e3PJgLO4o637mg81hyJlU2r7XKvES6denfNFKkNDW5viIC7B29HdwsH/TifjeGD zNWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531CWt3J2+Ip3cmW7y9fBt59qmpaDQf+XhlPJYcqqw8sgQZWqy2U HPZMEYednIvRiTbbk1eiYRo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwT4Vyv53PYLsn5zSl4IzWpe9za3Fb+CQSy263Mus/Yat0tHCKGbPfAGktTEz1GAAHrWfULTw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2203:: with SMTP id i3mr15558685wmi.163.1616414367396; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 04:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a01:4b00:f419:6f00:7a8e:ed70:5c52:ea3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f16sm19236096wrt.21.2021.03.22.04.59.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Mar 2021 04:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7eb39330834de50d2f3ee603adcd7f5501be9a83.camel@debian.org> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> Cc: "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>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 11:59:25 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20210322114101.GB1440@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20200818181222.8462-1-bluca@debian.org> <cb0eacfb0b2ce36493f45b0b5175fb72c25a4651.camel@debian.org> <CAATJJ0Juz0L89vzgapSKtg1yuiEXOE+xyTtwqQM5UHWcX3gkzg@mail.gmail.com> <20200901124747.GB1047@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <MWHPR11MB1805C61D3CB8DACB76C2CA2ABD2E0@MWHPR11MB1805.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAATJJ0KUsFY9_4HrzhQ9R2Tqq9PbBcYm1BOFQDH6DNdL=heAqg@mail.gmail.com> <BYAPR11MB3814CF4894EE5CDCB99E5338BD699@BYAPR11MB3814.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <673266d4-3be7-dffb-daa6-019fd85ed4b2@ovn.org> <BYAPR11MB381418337C7B687483BBBE97BD699@BYAPR11MB3814.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAATJJ0Jts=gOVAMH__6RXUA=3minp5PLeR7_cQbD4h6xcVtVWQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210322114101.GB1440@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5-1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 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> 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> wr= ote: > > > Hi Christian, Ilya > > >=20 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 8:18 PM > > > > To: Pai G, Sunil <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>; Christian Ehrhardt > > > > <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.c= om>; > > > > Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org>; Govindharajan, Hariprasad > > > > <hariprasad.govindharajan@intel.com> > > > > Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Luca Boccassi > > > > <bluca@debian.org>; stable@dpdk.org; dev <dev@dpdk.org>; James Page > > > > <james.page@canonical.com> > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] 19.11.4 patches review and test > > > >=20 > > > > 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 they = have > > > > > > broken builds as discussed here. > > > > > > Later on the communication was that all this works fine now and > > > > > > 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 agai= nst a > > > > > > DPDK that has those changes. > > > > > > Not 2.13.1 as we have it in Ubuntu nor (if it needs some OVS ch= anges > > > > > > backported) the recent 2.13.3 does build. > > > > > > They still fail with the very same issue I reported [2] back th= en. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > Unfortunately I have just released 19.11.7 so I can't revert th= em > > > > > > there - but OTOH reverting and counter reverting every other re= lease > > > > > > seems wrong anyway. > > > >=20 > > > > It is wrong indeed, but the main question here is why these patches= was > > > > backported to stable release in a first place? > > > >=20 > > > > Looking at these patches, they are not actual bug fixes but more li= ke "nice to > > > > have" features that additionally breaks the way application links w= ith DPDK. > > > > Stuff like that should not be acceptable to the stable release with= out 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, but= I don't > > think that gains us that much. > >=20 > > > > Since we already have a revert of revert, revert of revert of rever= t 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 nee= d to > > > > > > backport to 2.13.x to make this work? > > > > > > If they could be identified and prepared Distros could use them= on > > > > > > 2.13.3 asap and 2.13.4 could officially release them for OVS la= ter on. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > But for that we'd need a hint which OVS changes that would need= to be. > > > > > > All I know atm is from the testing reports on DPDK it seems tha= t 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 backporte= d 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/1608142365- > > > > 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 fixes= the issue > > > > you see.] But we must ensure it doesn=E2=80=99t cause problems for = OVS too. > > > > > Your thoughts Ilya ? > > > >=20 > > > > We had more fixes on top of this particular patch and I'd like to n= ot 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 cherr= y-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 mean= s 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 fla= gs"" > > 906e935a1f Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: output drivers first for > > static build"" > > deebf95239 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: move pkg-config file creat= ion"" > > a3bd9a34bf Revert "Revert "build: always link whole DPDK static librari= es"" > > d4bc124438 Revert "Revert "devtools: test static linkage with pkg-confi= g"" > >=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. This was requested by OVS, so if they don't need it anymore it's fine by me as well --=20 Kind regards, Luca Boccassi