Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 net-next 4/4] netvsc: refactor notifier/event handling code to use the failover framework

From: Stephen Hemminger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:04:06 -0700

On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 18:00:58 +0200
Jiri Pirko <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 05:28:02PM CEST, [email-masked] wrote:
> >On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:42:04 -0700
> >Sridhar Samudrala <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >  
> >> Use the registration/notification framework supported by the generic
> >> failover infrastructure.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <[email-masked]>  
> >
> >Do what you want to other devices but leave netvsc alone.
> >Adding these failover ops does not reduce the code size, and really is
> >no benefit.  The netvsc device driver needs to be backported to several
> >other distributions and doing this makes that harder.  
> 
> We should not care about the backport burden when we are trying to make
> things right. And things are not right. The current netvsc approach is
> just plain wrong shortcut. It should have been done in a generic way
> from the very beginning. We are just trying to fix this situation.
> 
> Moreover, I believe that part of the fix is to convert netvsc to 3
> netdev solution too. 2 netdev model is wrong.
> 
> 
> >
> >I will NAK patches to change to common code for netvsc especially the
> >three device model.  MS worked hard with distro vendors to support transparent
> >mode, ans we really can't have a new model; or do backport.
> >
> >Plus, DPDK is now dependent on existing model.  
> 
> Sorry, but nobody here cares about dpdk or other similar oddities.

The network device model is a userspace API, and DPDK is a userspace application.
You can't go breaking userspace even if you don't like the application.