On 3/25/19 9:05 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> Just this patch alone is too small to see the road ahead
> and 80+ patches are too much to review properly.
I will be sending in reviewable chunks. I think I have established a
history of evolving the code in small, singly focused patches moving the
code from where it is to where I want it to be. Any time there is a
'large' patch I try to keep it to something mechanical - like a name
change or a change to a function signature.
The email I sent ("net: Improve route scalability via support for
nexthop objects") outlined the targeted steps and the intermediate prep
work needed. To be able to reach certain clear steps and still maintain
the 20'ish patches in a set requirement, I have sent a few patches which
are standalone and basically noise - like this one - to avoid
distractions on the real change. I pushed the entire set to github so
anyone can see the end goal as well as the individual patches.
I am not sure what else I can do to be open about this change and convey
the what and the why. I discussed the feature at netconf in Seoul in
October 2017. I sent RFC patches last August on the UAPI with a working
implementation as well as more details about what this change is going
to allow. I have given talks on what I believe is the best architecture
and implementation for Linux which is the motivation for improving the
kernel. And the previous email about improving scalability is almost a
novelette in length.
