Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next 14/14] qed: bump driver version

From: Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:12:03 +0200

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 08:18:08AM +0000, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > From: [email-masked] <linux-rdma-
> > [email-masked]> On Behalf Of Leon Romanovsky
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 8:21 PM
> > To: Michal Kalderon <[email-masked]>
> > Cc: Ariel Elior <[email-masked]>; [email-masked];
> > [email-masked]; [email-masked]; linux-
> > [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next 14/14] qed: bump driver version
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:39:26PM +0000, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 6:14 PM
> > > >
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > -- On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 05:26:27PM +0200, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > > > > The FW brings along a large set of fixes and features which will
> > > > > be added at a later phase. This is an adaquete point to bump the
> > > > > driver
> > > > version.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ariel Elior <[email-masked]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Kalderon <[email-masked]>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed.h | 2 +-
> > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > We discussed this a lot, those driver version bumps are stupid and
> > > > have nothing close to the reality. Distro kernels are based on some
> > > > kernel version with extra patches on top, in RedHat world this "extra"
> > > > is a lot. For them your driver version say nothing. For users who
> > > > run vanilla kernel, those versions are not relevant too, because
> > > > running such kernels requires knowledge and understanding.
> > > >
> > > > You definitely should stop this enterprise cargo cult of "releasing
> > software"
> > > > by updating versions in non-controlled by you distribution chain.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > Due to past discussions on this topic, qedr driver version was not added
> > and not bumped.
> > > However, customers are used to seeing a driver version for qed/qede We
> > > only bump major version changes (37 -> 42)  and not the minor versions
> > anymore.
> > > This does give a high-level understanding of the driver supports, helps us
> > and the customers.
> >
> > It is worth to talk with customers instead of adding useless work for
> > everyone involved here.
> Hi Leon,
>
> I understand your arguments, and for new drivers I agree it is best to start without a driver version, having said that
> Customers are used to what is already out there.
>
> Ethtool displays a driver version, and  customers go by driver version, not kernel version.
> Mlx drivers haven't bumped the driver version, but it is still displayed when running ethtool.

Yes, it is needed to be fixed.

>
> Having this version in upstream driver also helps us to understand the level of changes in the inbox driver.
> As you mentioned, in some distributions like RHEL, kernel version has no meaning as they backport much newer functionality from upstream.
> It is difficult to know based on RedHat kernel/driver, how the driver compares with the upstream driver or what functionality is there.
> We have seen that the driver version greatly helps customers here.
>
> Of course if a decision is taken to remove all ethernet driver versions from all vendors and remove the version display from ethtool
> We won't object, but since it is still there, and the driver version until now does correlate in the high-level sense to functionality,
> I don't see the harm in this single patch.
>
> Dave, what is your take on this ?

Dave was clear about it.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/[email-masked]

> Thanks,
> Michal
> > Thanks