LVS
lvs-devel
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: [PATCHv2 ipvs-next 3/3] netfilter: ipvs: Refactor Maglev hashing sch

To: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 ipvs-next 3/3] netfilter: ipvs: Refactor Maglev hashing scheduler
Cc: lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wensong Zhang <wensong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Inju Song <inju.song@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 20:36:26 +0900
        Hello,

On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 11:22:34AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> 
>       Hello,
> 
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, Inju Song wrote:
> 
> > >   Makefile and Kconfig should be a last patch, otherwise
> > > on bisecting we will fail to compile.
> > >
> > 
> >     Ok. I will move Makefile and Kconfig patch to last of the
> > patchsets in the next v3 patchsets. Then do I include a patch about
> > last_weight again?
> 
>       I would say that you make the review from other people
> difficult because they have to keep all previous submissions.
> You should submit the 3 patches every time, with new PATCHv<N>
> number. And these patches should not be relative to previous
> versions but to the net-next kernel, i.e. the patchset should
> be easy to include upstream. When all issues are resolved we
> will ack the latest patchset version and the process ends,
> patchset is submitted to other maintainers.
> 

        I see. I misunderstood the relative patches is more
helpful to review because they present diffrence between
patch A and patch B but I did not think to include to upstream.
The next v3 patch will be new patches regardless of the previous
version.

> > > > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_mh.c
> > > > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_mh.c
> > > 
> > >   There must be license info at the beginning.
> > > 
> > 
> >     May be I will use GPLv1 license. Should I write the license info
> > like other source(ie. the beginning of ip_vs_sh.c)?
> 
>       Yes, at the beginning. According to
> Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the GPLv1 is placed in
> 'other' dir (LICENSES/other/GPL-1.0) and so is not "recommended"
> for new code. Also, instead of license text you can put such
> line as first in ip_vs_mh.c:
> 
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> 
>       And that should be enough for the license. After that
> line you can put more text which includes your name as Author,
> info about the algorithm, links to used resources, etc.
> For example:
> 
> /* The algorithm is detailed in:
>  * [3.4 Consistent Hasing]
>  * 
> https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/ko//pubs/archive/44824.pdf
>  */
> 
>       You can 'grep -r SPDX net/' for references.
> 

        Yep, I will put GPLv2 license with SPDX, Author and info
about the algorithm at below of the license.

> Regards
> 
> --
> Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
> 
> 

Regards

-- 
Inju Song
NAVER Corporation

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>