[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7F861DC0615E0C47A872E6F3C5FCDDBD05E53D11@BPXM14GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 03:01:45 +0000
From: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com>
To: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
CC: "vyasevic@...hat.com" <vyasevic@...hat.com>,
"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Choi, Sy Jong" <sy.jong.choi@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Hayato Momma <h-momma@...jp.nec.com>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
"Or Gerlitz" <gerlitz.or@...il.com>,
Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
Subject: RE: [E1000-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] if_link: Add VF multicast
promiscuous control
> On Mon, 2015-03-09 at 18:52 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 01:42 +0000, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:
> > > > On 03/08/2015 02:15 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Jeff Kirsher
> > > > > <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> wrote:
> > > > > [...]
> > > > >> We discussed this during NetConf last week, and Don is correct
> > > that a
> > > > >> custom sysfs interface is not the way we want to handle this. We
> > > agreed
> > > > >> upon a generic interface so that any NIC is able to turn on or
> > > off VF
> > > > >> multicast promiscuous mode.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff, please make sure to either respond to my comments on the V2
> > > > > thread (or better) address them for the V3 post.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=142441852518152&w=2
> > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=142441867218183&w=2
> > > >
> > > > I agree with you that the patch descriptions should be cleaned up
> > > and
> > > > "beefed" up for that matter.
> > > >
> > > > If/when I look to push his series of patches, I will make sure that
> > > your
> > > > concerns are addressed so that we can get a accurate changelog.
> > >
> > > I see that the patchset should have better explanation in changelog.
> > > I will rewrite it and submit again.
> > >
> > > Jeff, are you planning to drop the patchset from your tree?
> > > I just concerned which tree I should create patches against for.
> >
> > Yes, I will drop the current patchset in my queue. I am in the process
> > of updating my queue, go ahead and make your patches against the
> > following tree:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jkirsher/next-queue.git
> > all-queue branch
> >
> > If you give me an hour or so, I should have my tree updated with all the
> > patches in my queue currently.
>
> Ok, correction on the branch name. After doing some cleanup and future
> planning, the following tree:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jkirsher/next-queue.git
> is what you want to use and the branch name is:
> unstable-queue
>
> The branch has all the patches currently in my queue.
OK, now I have the above branch:
From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jkirsher/next-queue
d7ed747..115403d master -> jeff-next/master
* [new branch] unstable-queue -> jeff-next/unstable-queue
I will work against that tree.
thanks,
Hiroshi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists