linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/2] allocate multiple skbuffs on tx

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:34:44 +0300
From:   Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
To:     Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
CC:     Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
        <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kernel@...rdevices.ru>, <oxffffaa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/2] allocate multiple skbuffs on tx



On 23.03.2023 14:11, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:53:40PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23.03.2023 13:48, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:01:40PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>> Hello Stefano,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for review!
>>>
>>> You're welcome!
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since both patches are R-b, i can wait for a few days, then send this
>>>> as 'net-next'?
>>>
>>> Yep, maybe even this series could have been directly without RFC ;-)
>>
>> "directly", You mean 'net' tag? Of just without RFC, like [PATCH v5]. In this case
>> it will be merged to 'net' right?
> 
> Sorry for the confusion. I meant without RFC but with net-next.
> 
> Being enhancements and not fixes this is definitely net-next material,
> so even in RFCs you can already use the net-next tag, so the reviewer
> knows which branch to apply them to. (It's not super important since
> being RFCs it's expected that it's not complete, but it's definitely an
> help for the reviewer).
> 
> Speaking of the RFC, we usually use it for patches that we don't think
> are ready to be merged. But when they reach a good state (like this
> series for example), we can start publishing them already without the
> RFC tag.
> 
> Anyway, if you are not sure, use RFC and then when a maintainer has
> reviewed them all, surely you can remove the RFC tag.
> 
> Hope this helps, at least that's what I usually do, so don't take that
> as a strict rule ;-)

Ah ok, I see now, thanks for details

Thanks, Arseniy

> 
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>