lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 11:13:58 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>, oss-drivers@...ronome.com, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2 net] bitfield.h cleanups On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 10:44:30 -0700 Nick Desaulniers wrote: > Hi David, > I read through https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/netdev-FAQ.html#q-how-often-do-changes-from-these-trees-make-it-to-the-mainline-linus-tree > and noticed http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html. Since the > merge window just opened, it sounds like I'll need to wait 2 weeks for > it to close before resending? Is that correct? Based on: > > > IMPORTANT: Do not send new net-next content to netdev during the period during which net-next tree is closed. > > Then based on the next section in the doc, it sounds like I was > missing which tree to put the patch in, in the subject? I believe > these patches should target net-next (not net) since they're not > addressing regressions from the most recent cycle. > > Do I have all that right? Nick, please repost the first patch only (to:dave, cc:netdev,..., subject "[PATCH net resend] ...") and I'm pretty sure Dave will re-consider it, it's a build fix after all. In any case reviewing a patch with a short explanation under the commit message on why it's resend is easier [1] for a maintainer to process than digging through conversations. [1] may be related to the use of patchwork on netdev
Powered by blists - more mailing lists