From owner-svn-src-stable@freebsd.org Tue Feb 12 08:45:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AABA114DCA39; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 08:45:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3338D809C4; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 08:45:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x1C8j0n6056169; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:45:00 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6B02FE2; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:44:59 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: svn commit: r344027 - in stable/12/sys: dev/vmware/vmxnet3 modules/vmware/vmxnet3 net To: rgrimes@freebsd.org, Patrick Kelsey Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, John Baldwin , svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable-12@freebsd.org References: <201902120125.x1C1PX7G073631@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> From: Harry Schmalzbauer Organization: OmniLAN Message-ID: <47b11231-32d5-df41-2043-25f26484c664@omnilan.de> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:44:59 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201902120125.x1C1PX7G073631@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: ACL 130 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.130]); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:45:00 +0100 (CET) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: 78.138.80.135; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3338D809C4 X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.94 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.95)[-0.945,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for all the -stable branches of the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 08:45:04 -0000 Am 12.02.2019 um 02:25 schrieb Rodney W. Grimes: >> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:08 PM John Baldwin wrote: >> >>> On 2/11/19 4:26 PM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >>>>> Author: pkelsey >>>>> Date: Mon Feb 11 23:24:39 2019 >>>>> New Revision: 344027 >>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/344027 >>>>> >>>>> Log: >>>>> MFC r343291: >>>>> Convert vmx(4) to being an iflib driver. >>>> I strongly object to this MFC, given the current number >>>> of 12.0 RELEASE related iflib problems we have it is >>>> foolish of us to iflib any more drivers in 12.0 >>> This isn't the release branch though and presumably we have some time >>> before >>> 12.1 ships. If there are reports of vmx(4) breakage on stable before 12.1 >>> we could always revert this commit then? >>> >>> I've heard of some EN's for 12.0 for iflib fixes. Are those fixes in >>> stable/12 >>> yet or are we still waiting for them to land in HEAD and/or be merged? >>> >> iflib.c is currently the same between head and stable/12. I've found and >> fixed a number of iflib bugs by developing the iflib version of the vmx(4) >> driver, and it's also being fielded in a product. I'm also aware that not >> all current driver problems are necessarily iflib problems. I think we'd >> be better off letting this version of vmx(4) ride it out in stable/12 until >> such time as we discover an actual horror that we then feel we need to >> react to in some way other than just going ahead and fixing it. > It can ride it out in head just fine, give it 3 months... plenty of time > before any 12.1. stable/12 IS NOT A TEST GROUND. I don't think the intention of this MFC is to test the iflib(4) version of vmx(4), but to improve the driver, which has been tested locally by the devop and also in HEAD for some time. Many regressions/problem(combinations) aren't found during HEAD lifetime, but after MFC.  And in case of iflib(4), it wasn't the MFC to -STABLE, but after -RELEASE. If it would have had a wider production (-STABLE) usage, possibly... As long as the devop isn't aware of known, yet to fix _additional_ bugs or any regression, I'm happy to reduce my local MFC patchset and have it in STABLE as soon as the devops MFC timeframe lapsed without a single regression/problem notification.  I've never updated any -stable production machine relying on the hope someone else tested every possible change.  That's what I'd like to beeing allowed to expect from -RELEASE; which hasn't ever been true for major version updates. So this MFC won't harm -stable in any form, but will improve 12.1-release quality. Just a/my opinion from the users view! Thanks, -harry