[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+6hz4rWg6LW3=rLJwosFmAHDO70CnBzkPq3NBy0-bnuoQhNjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 14:24:36 +0800
From: Feng Gao <gfree.wind@...il.com>
To: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@...halink.fr>
Cc: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>, jchapman@...alix.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Philp Prindeville <philipp@...fish-solutions.com>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] l2tp: Use existing macros instead of literal number
Sorry, I forget to modify the title.
I will sent another update.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Guillaume Nault <g.nault@...halink.fr> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:55:26PM +0800, fgao@...ai8.com wrote:
>> From: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>
>>
>> 1. Use PPP_ALLSTATIONS/PPP_UI instead of literal 0xff/0x03;
>> 2. Use one static const global fixed_ppphdr instead of two same
>> static variable ppph in two different functions;
>> 3. Use SEND_SHUTDOWN instead of literal 2;
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>
>> ---
>> v1: Initial patch
>>
> v1 again?
>
> BTW, no need to number your patch for a single patch series.
> But you have to tell which tree is the series for.
>
> So instead of [PATCH v1 1/1], you should send [PATCH v2 net-next].
Powered by blists - more mailing lists