From: Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:51:17 -0700
> No, but I do expect that you support code that is already there. There > was apparently zero testing done on the original patch and it caused > one very obvious regression. So how can we have any confidence > whatsoever that this patch doesn't break other things? Furthermore, > with all these claims of bugs I still don't see that _anyone_ has > taken the time to reproduce any issue and show that this patch > materially fixes any thing. I seriously don't understand how basic > testing could be such a challenge. > > Anyway, what I expect is moot. It's up to davem to decide what to do > with this... You being upset with a lack of testing is one issue, and is legitimate. But the fact that we can't support, and never could support, more than one network header at a time except in a very special case for GRO is very real. And you must acknowledge that this was a very shaky foundation upon which to erect the kinds of things you expect to work.
