netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] openvswitch: Use eth_mac

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

Message-ID: <CAEP_g=_sAOsQAXQXELDUAc3vFPgXAYbQUG6THfcsuNvXg7+M8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 3 Dec 2012 14:55:17 -0800
From:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] openvswitch: Use eth_mac_addr() instead of
 duplicating it

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch> wrote:
> On 12/03/12 at 02:36pm, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch> wrote:
>> >
>> > bonus: if we ever are to use IFF_LIVE_ADDR_CHANGE for
>> > anything further than to check availability in eth_mac_addr(),
>> > Open vSwitch will be ready for that.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
>>
>> There's no need to send this patch twice (especially to a different
>> set of people).  I'm currently reviewing a large patchset that was
>> submitted before yours.
>
> It's a trivial patch, you seemed busy and we might as well make use
> of the open net-next window. I see nothing wrong with that.

If you send patches like this to two different trees then it will
result in merge conflicts later.  Please just wait a few days; as you
say, it's a trivial patch.
--
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