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