netdev - Re: [PATCH 4/5] ucc_geth: Increase RX ring buffer from 32 to 64

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: <OFA3DBC011.F1E51FFB-ONC1257A8C.006E2EE6-C1257A8C.006F1C0A@transmode.se>
Date:	Wed, 3 Oct 2012 22:13:36 +0200
From:	Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ucc_geth: Increase RX ring buffer from 32 to 64

David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote on 2012/10/03 21:38:55:
>
> From: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:17:58 +0200
>
> > Ping? Got no comments and I can see it in net or net-next trees either.
>
> No patch will be applied to the tree when one of the indiviual patches
> get feedback and request changes from you.
>
> When an individual patch must be redone, you must resend the entire
> series not just the individual patch which changed.

oh, I see what I did wrong. I sent them as series which may have internal dependencies.
However, each patch can be applied on its own.

>
> You also never need to ask the kind of question you are asking here,
> you simply need to look into patch work to see what the state of
> your patches is:
>
> I maintain this state exactly so people don't need to waste precious
> developer time asking "what is the state of my patch" like you are
> making me do right here.
>
> See:
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?state=*&q=ucc_geth

Ahh, better bookmark this page for future use.

>
> And as you can see this entire series is marked as either "RFC"
> or "Changes Requested"

Yes, I see that now.
I guess I should resend each patch separately then?
(Possibly wait until I have figured out the lockless TX stuff)

>
> Even worse, you did this for not one but several of the patches you
> posted.

Sorry about that.

 Jocke

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html