[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250520151817.GA1249@sol>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 08:18:17 -0700
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Bernard Metzler <BMT@...ich.ibm.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 04/10] RDMA/siw: use skb_crc32c() instead of
__skb_checksum()
On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 04:18:41PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 09:04:04AM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote:
> >
>
> <...>
>
> > >
> >
> > Thanks Eric!
> > Works fine. Correct checksum tested against siw and cxgb4 peers.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Bernard Metzler <bmt@...ich.ibm.com>
>
> This patch should go through RDMA repository, Please resend it.
>
> Thanks
It depends on patches 1-2, and patches 6-7 depend on this one. So your proposal
would require that we drag this out over 3 cycles (patches 1-3,5,8-10 in net in
6.16, patch 4 in RDMA in 6.17, patches 6-7 in net in 6.18). Can we please just
take the whole series through net in 6.16? There aren't any conflicts.
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists