[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1800343a-1aeb-82ad-b3fe-8633b55103bf@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:01:00 -0400
From: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Tal Alon <talal@...lanox.com>,
Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [for-next V3 00/15][PULL request] Mellanox mlx5 core driver
updates 2016-08-20
On 8/23/2016 2:39 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 07:10:53PM +0300, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/23/2016 4:49 AM, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
>>>> From Hadar and Ilya, added the needed hardware bits and infrastructure for
>>>> minimum inline headers setting and encap/decap commands and capabilities,
>>>> needed for E-Switch offloads.
>>>
>>> These looked fine to me, but aren't really in the RDMA area anyway.
>
> Our internal goal is to have 0-merge conflicts between RDMA and net
> trees.
>
Sure, I'm aware of that and fully understand it means that a single pull
like this will have mixed patches between the two. I was just pointing
out that even though I looked at them and they looked OK to me based on
my cursory review, they are something DaveM needs to approve, not me.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
GPG Key ID: 0E572FDD
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (885 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists