From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
To: "Pai G, Sunil" <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>
Cc: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org>,
"Stokes, Ian" <ian.stokes@intel.com>,
"Govindharajan, Hariprasad" <hariprasad.govindharajan@intel.com>,
"Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>,
James Page <james.page@canonical.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] 19.11.4 patches review and test
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 10:49:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAATJJ0Jts=gOVAMH__6RXUA=3minp5PLeR7_cQbD4h6xcVtVWQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR11MB381418337C7B687483BBBE97BD699@BYAPR11MB3814.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 7:25 PM Pai G, Sunil <sunil.pai.g@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Christian, Ilya
>
> > -----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.com>;
> > 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
> >
> > On 3/18/21 2:36 PM, Pai G, Sunil wrote:
> > > Hey Christian,
> > >
> > > <snipped>
> > >
> > >> 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].
> > >>
> > >> But today we were made aware that still no OVS 2.13 builds against 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.
> > >>
> > >> 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.
> >
> > It is wrong indeed, but the main question here is why these patches was
> > backported to stable release in a first place?
> >
> > 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 without a strong
> > justification or, at least, testing with actual applications.
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.
> > Since we already have a revert of revert, revert of revert of revert doesn't
> > seem so bad.
As long as we don't extend this series, yeah
> > >>
> > >> I wanted to ask if there is a set of patches that OVS would need 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 later on.
> > >>
> > >> 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 that 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 backported to
> > >> work again in regard to this build issue.
> > >
> > > 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/
> > >
> > > 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’t cause problems for OVS too.
> > > Your thoughts Ilya ?
> >
> > 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.
>
> I agree, we had more fixes on top of this. It would be risky to cherry-pick.
> So it might be a better option to revert.
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 means that
those original changes would not be present anymore in 19.11.x.
f49248a990 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: prevent overlinking""
39586a4cf0 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: improve static linking flags""
906e935a1f Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: output drivers first for
static build""
deebf95239 Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: move pkg-config file creation""
a3bd9a34bf Revert "Revert "build: always link whole DPDK static libraries""
d4bc124438 Revert "Revert "devtools: test static linkage with pkg-config""
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)
And finally, I wonder if I'd just push those to the 19.11 git branch OR should
also release a 19.11.8 with just those changes sometime soon - opinions?
> > For users stable releases should be
> > transparent, i.e. should not have disruptive changes that will break their
> > ability to build with version of a library that they would like to use.
> >
> > What are exact changes we're talking about? Will it still be possible to build
> > OVS with older versions of a stable 19.11 if these changes applied?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> [1]: http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk-stable/log/?h=19.11&ofs=550
> > >> [2]: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/2020-September/024796.html
> > > <snipped>
> > >
> > > Thanks and regards,
> > > Sunil
> > >
--
Christian Ehrhardt
Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-22 9:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-18 18:12 Luca Boccassi
2020-08-24 13:22 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2020-08-24 13:25 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Luca Boccassi
2020-08-25 9:13 ` [dpdk-dev] " Pei Zhang
2020-08-25 10:08 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-08-26 2:30 ` Chen, BoX C
2020-08-26 9:50 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-08-27 9:47 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2020-08-27 10:37 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-08-27 10:57 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2020-08-27 13:23 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-08-28 4:03 ` Wang, ShougangX
2020-08-28 7:52 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-08-28 14:34 ` Govindharajan, Hariprasad
2020-08-28 15:23 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-08-30 14:36 ` Ali Alnubani
2020-08-31 9:13 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-09-01 8:30 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-09-01 12:32 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2020-09-01 12:47 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-09-01 13:22 ` Pai G, Sunil
2020-09-01 15:10 ` Stokes, Ian
2020-09-07 14:25 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Luca Boccassi
2021-03-18 11:54 ` [dpdk-dev] " Christian Ehrhardt
2021-03-18 13:36 ` Pai G, Sunil
2021-03-18 14:48 ` Ilya Maximets
2021-03-18 18:24 ` Pai G, Sunil
2021-03-22 9:49 ` Christian Ehrhardt [this message]
2021-03-22 11:41 ` Bruce Richardson
2021-03-22 11:59 ` Luca Boccassi
2021-03-22 12:25 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-03-22 14:27 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2021-03-23 18:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-03-23 18:51 ` Ilya Maximets
2021-03-24 7:44 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2021-03-24 10:28 ` Pai G, Sunil
2021-03-24 13:02 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2020-09-01 12:49 ` Luca Boccassi
2020-09-01 13:01 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-09-01 13:28 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-09-01 18:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXTERNAL] " Abhishek Marathe
2020-09-02 10:47 ` Luca Boccassi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAATJJ0Jts=gOVAMH__6RXUA=3minp5PLeR7_cQbD4h6xcVtVWQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com \
--cc=bluca@debian.org \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=hariprasad.govindharajan@intel.com \
--cc=i.maximets@ovn.org \
--cc=ian.stokes@intel.com \
--cc=james.page@canonical.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=sunil.pai.g@intel.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).