On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:05:44AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 12:08:27PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > > > > > On 13.12.2023 11:43, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 08:43:07PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On 12.12.2023 19:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 06:59:03PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 12.12.2023 18:54, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >>>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 12:16:54AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > >>>>>> Hello, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> DESCRIPTION > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> This patchset fixes old problem with hungup of both rx/tx sides and adds > > >>>>>> test for it. This happens due to non-default SO_RCVLOWAT value and > > >>>>>> deferred credit update in virtio/vsock. Link to previous old patchset: > > >>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/39b2e9fd-601b-189d-39a9-914e5574524c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Patchset: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks! > > >>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> But I worry whether we actually need 3/8 in net not in net-next. > > >>>> > > >>>> Because of "Fixes" tag ? I think this problem is not critical and reproducible > > >>>> only in special cases, but i'm not familiar with netdev process so good, so I don't > > >>>> have strong opinion. I guess @Stefano knows better. > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks, Arseniy > > >>> > > >>> Fixes means "if you have that other commit then you need this commit > > >>> too". I think as a minimum you need to rearrange patches to make the > > >>> fix go in first. We don't want a regression followed by a fix. > > >> > > >> I see, ok, @Stefano WDYT? I think rearrange doesn't break anything, because this > > >> patch fixes problem that is not related with the new patches from this patchset. > > > > > > I agree, patch 3 is for sure net material (I'm fine with both rearrangement or send it separately), but IMHO also patch 2 could be. > > > I think with the same fixes tag, since before commit b89d882dc9fc ("vsock/virtio: reduce credit update messages") we sent a credit update > > > for every bytes we read, so we should not have this problem, right? > > > > Agree for 2, so I think I can rearrange: two fixes go first, then current 0001, and then tests. And send it as V9 for 'net' only ? > > > > Thanks, Arseniy > > > hmm why not net-next? Oh I missed your previous discussion. I think everything in net-next is safer. Having said that, I won't nack it net, either. > > > > > > So, maybe all the series could be "net". > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Stefano > > >
