netdev - Re: [PATCH ipsec 0/3] vti/vti6: minor tweaks + one fix

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: <20140630091913.GO32371@secunet.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:19:13 +0200
From:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:	Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>
CC:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec 0/3] vti/vti6: minor tweaks + one fix

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:38:32PM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote:
> On 13 May 2014 10:41, Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 11:43:39PM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote:
> >> Hi Steffen,
> >>
> >> this series addresses a few issues related to VTI. The first patch fixes
> >> a bug in the vti6 module calling unregister_pernet_device() twice in the
> >> error path. That's probably material for ipsec.git.
> >> The second patch simplifies the error handling path in module init/fini
> >> of vti6. The third patch does the same for vti. Those two are probably
> >> material for ipsec-next.git as we're at -rc5 already. But I leave that
> >> decision to you.
> >
> > Right, patches two and three should go to ipsec-next. But the second
> > patch does not apply without the first patch. Please send separate
> > patchsets for ipsec and ipsec-next in future.
> 
> Patch 2 depends on patch 1 because it's a series ;) I explicitly
> didn't want to create different patches for ipsec-next because I
> wanted to avoid the merge conflicts on your side when ipsec-next would
> rebase to/merge a tree which would contain patch 1.
> One way to solve it would be to merge ipsec/master into
> ipsec-next/master prior to applying patches 2 and 3 -- just as Dave
> does with net-next from time to time, i.e. merging net/master. Another
> way would be to wait until Dave has merged ipsec/master into
> net/master and after that, has merged net/master into net-next. This
> way you can merge net-next into ipsec-next and after that apply
> patches 2 and 3 without conflicts. Your choice. You know the
> interdependencies between these trees better than me. But the first
> solution sounds simpler to me. ;)
> 

I've applied the remaining two patches to ipsec-next now, thanks!
--
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