Hi Greg,
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 09:10:36PM +0200, Ilya Maximets wrote: > On 5/19/22 20:04, Gregory Rose wrote: > > > > > > On 4/15/2022 2:42 PM, Greg Rose wrote: > >> It is time to remove support for the OVS kernel driver and push > >> towards use of the upstream Linux openvswitch kernel driver > >> in it's place [1]. > >> > >> This patch series represents a first attempt but there are a few > >> primary remaining issues that I have yet to address. > >> > >> A) Removal of debian packing support for the dkms kernel driver > >> module. The debian/rules are not well known to me - I've never > >> actually made any changes in that area and do not have a > >> well formed understanding of how debian packaging works. I wil > >> attempt to fix that up in upcoming patch series. > >> B) Figuring out how the github workflow - I removed the tests I > >> could find that depend on the Linux kernel (i.e. they use > >> install_kernel() function. Several other tests are failing > >> that would not seem to depend on the Linux kernel. I need to > >> read and understand that code better. > >> C) There are many Linux specific source modules in the datapath that > >> will need eventual removal but some headers are still required for > >> the userspace code (which seems counterintuitive but...) > >> > >> Reviews, suggestions, etc. are appreciated! > >> > >> 1. https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2022-April/393292.html > > > > I would like to suggest at this time that rather than removing the OVS > > Linux kernel path that we "freeze" it at Linux 5.8. This will make it > > easier for some consumers of OVS that are continuing to support the > > Linux kernel datapath in old distributions. > > > > The ultimate goal of shifting toward DPDK and AFXDP datapaths is still > > preserved but we are placing less burden on some consumers of OVS for > > older Linux distributions. > > > > Perhaps in suggesting removal of the kernel datapath I was being a bit > > overly aggressive. > > > > Thoughts? Concerns? Other suggestions? > > Hi. I think we discussed that before. Removal from the master branch > doesn't mean that we will stop supporting the kernel module immediately. > It will remain in branch 2.17 which will become our new LTS series soon. > This branch will be supported until 2025. And we also talked about > possibility of extending the support just for a kernel module on that > branch, if required. It's not necassary to use the kernel module and > OVS form the same branch, obviously. > > Removal from the master branch will just make it possible to remove > the maintenance burden eventually, not right away. > > And FWIW, the goal is not to force everyone to use userspace datapath, > but remove a maintenance burden and push users to use a better supported > version of a code. Frankly, we're not doing a great job supporting the > out-of-tree module these days. It's getting hard to backport bug fixes. > And will be even harder over time since the code drifts away from the > version in the upstream kernel. Mainly because we're not backporting > new features for a few years already. > > Does that make sense? Any thoughts on this? The freeze time is approaching, so it would be great to know your plans for this patch set. Thanks, fbl _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
