netdev - Re: [net-next v3 00/20][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates 2019-12-09

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: <20191210182543.GE46@ziepe.ca>
Date:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 14:25:43 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        nhorman@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com, parav@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [net-next v3 00/20][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates
 2019-12-09

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 10:06:41AM -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > Please don't send new RDMA drivers in pull requests to net. This
> > driver is completely unreviewed at this point.
> 
> This was done because you requested a for a single pull request in an
> earlier submission 9 months ago.  I am fine with breaking up submission,
> even though the RDMA driver would be dependent upon the virtual bus and LAN
> driver changes.

If I said that I ment a single pull request *to RDMA* with Dave's acks
on the net side, not a single pull request to net.

Given the growth of the net side changes this may be better to use a
shared branch methodology.

Jason