linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/14] devlink and mlx5: Support cross-function rate scheduling

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]

Message-ID: <f828d5d5-6ba3-4e9c-a7fb-3a0193f7e9bf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2025 08:57:58 +0200
From: Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>,
 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
 Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
 Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
 Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>, Carolina Jubran <cjubran@...dia.com>,
 Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@...dia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/14] devlink and mlx5: Support cross-function
 rate scheduling

On 21/11/2025 5:39, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2025 15:09:12 +0200 Tariq Toukan wrote:
>> Code dependency:
>> This series should apply cleanly after the pulling of
>> 'net-2025_11_19_05_03', specifically commit f94c1a114ac2 ("devlink:
>> rate: Unset parent pointer in devl_rate_nodes_destroy").
> 
> repost please, we don't do dependencies
> 

Hi,

I submitted the code before my weekend as we have a gap of ~1.5 working 
days (timezones + Friday). It could be utilized for collecting feedback 
on the proposed solution, or even get it accepted.

I referred to a net-* tag from the net branch, part of your regular 
process, that was about to get merged any minute. Btw it was indeed 
pulled before this response, so our series would in fact apply cleanly.

Anyway, not a big deal, I'm re-posting the series now.

Regards,
Tariq