mbox series

[net,v2,0/2] net: dqs: NIC stall detector

Message ID 20240131102150.728960-1-leitao@debian.org
Headers
Series net: dqs: NIC stall detector |

Message

Breno Leitao Jan. 31, 2024, 10:21 a.m. UTC 
  This is a patch that was sent by Jakub Kicinski six month ago, and I
am reviving it.

This is still mostly Jakub's code, with some small improvements,
described in the changelog.

Changelog:
----------

v1:
  * https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/202306172057.jx7YhLiu-lkp@intel.com/T/

v2:
  * Fix the documentation file in patch 0001, since patch 0002 will
    touch it later.
  * Fix the kernel test robot issues, marking functions as statics.
  * Use #include <linux/bitops.h> instead of <asm/bitops.h>.
  * Added some new comments around, mainly around barriers.
  * Format struct `netdev_queue_attribute` assignments to make
    checkpatch happy.
  * Updated and fixed the path in sysfs-class-net-queues
    documentation.

Breno Leitao (1):
  net: sysfs: Fix /sys/class/net/<iface> path

Jakub Kicinski (1):
  net: dqs: add NIC stall detector based on BQL

 .../ABI/testing/sysfs-class-net-queues        | 45 ++++++++++----
 include/linux/dynamic_queue_limits.h          | 35 +++++++++++
 include/trace/events/napi.h                   | 33 ++++++++++
 lib/dynamic_queue_limits.c                    | 58 +++++++++++++++++
 net/core/net-sysfs.c                          | 62 +++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

Comments

Jakub Kicinski Feb. 1, 2024, 4:14 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 02:21:48 -0800 Breno Leitao wrote:
> Breno Leitao (1):
>   net: sysfs: Fix /sys/class/net/<iface> path

Let me take this on in, but the other one is not a fix,
so it has to go to net-next.
patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org Feb. 1, 2024, 4:30 p.m. UTC | #2 
Hello:

This series was applied to netdev/net.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 02:21:48 -0800 you wrote:
> This is a patch that was sent by Jakub Kicinski six month ago, and I
> am reviving it.
> 
> This is still mostly Jakub's code, with some small improvements,
> described in the changelog.
> 
> Changelog:
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [net,v2,1/2] net: sysfs: Fix /sys/class/net/<iface> path
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/ae3f4b44641d
  - [net,v2,2/2] net: dqs: add NIC stall detector based on BQL
    (no matching commit)

You are awesome, thank you!
Breno Leitao Feb. 1, 2024, 6:47 p.m. UTC | #3 
On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 08:14:32AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 02:21:48 -0800 Breno Leitao wrote:
> > Breno Leitao (1):
> >   net: sysfs: Fix /sys/class/net/<iface> path
> 
> Let me take this on in, but the other one is not a fix,
> so it has to go to net-next.

Sure. I didn't know how to split the dependencies. Maybe I should have
sent both of them to net-next, and you would cherry-pick the fix to net?
Is this a better approach for next time?
Jakub Kicinski Feb. 1, 2024, 7:43 p.m. UTC | #4 
On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 10:47:40 -0800 Breno Leitao wrote:
> > Let me take this on in, but the other one is not a fix,
> > so it has to go to net-next.  
> 
> Sure. I didn't know how to split the dependencies. Maybe I should have
> sent both of them to net-next, and you would cherry-pick the fix to net?
> Is this a better approach for next time?

You gotta send the net part and then wait until Thu afternoon Pacific
time when Linus pulls from us. We then pull net (and Linus's tree into
net-next).
Breno Leitao Feb. 2, 2024, 3:06 p.m. UTC | #5 
On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 11:43:18AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 10:47:40 -0800 Breno Leitao wrote:
> > > Let me take this on in, but the other one is not a fix,
> > > so it has to go to net-next.  
> > 
> > Sure. I didn't know how to split the dependencies. Maybe I should have
> > sent both of them to net-next, and you would cherry-pick the fix to net?
> > Is this a better approach for next time?
> 
> You gotta send the net part and then wait until Thu afternoon Pacific
> time when Linus pulls from us. We then pull net (and Linus's tree into
> net-next).

Thanks for the clarification. I will wait for that before sending the
second patch against net-next.