[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+mtBx9aXUxZZodQi=QcDx22EzeX+Ch2p1qnpT2w6F2jmou3GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 12:07:19 -0800
From: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, rdunlap@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ip_tunnel: Ops registration for secondary encap (fou, gue)
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:03 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 11:54:09 -0800
>
>> Instead of calling fou and gue functions directly from ip_tunnel
>> use ops for these that were previously registered. This patch adds the
>> logic to add and remove encapsulation operations for ip_tunnel,
>> and modified fou (and gue) to register with ip_tunnels.
>>
>> This patch also addresses a circular dependency between ip_tunnel
>> and fou that was causing link errors when CONFIG_NET_IP_TUNNEL=y
>> and CONFIG_NET_FOU=m. References to fou an gue have been removed from
>> ip_tunnel.c
>>
>> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
>
> Applied, please in the future be explicit about the target tree by
> saying "[PATCH net-next]" or similar in your Subj.
>
> I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time I've had to ask this of
> you. :-/
>
I was unsure which branch to target since the bug was reported in
linux-next. Is next-next appropriate in this case?
Thanks,
Tom
> Thanks Tom.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists