[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210702083347.GU2040@kadam>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 11:33:47 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc: Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@...gle.com>, csully@...gle.com,
sagis@...gle.com, jonolson@...gle.com, davem@...emloft.net,
kuba@...nel.org, awogbemila@...gle.com, willemb@...gle.com,
yangchun@...gle.com, bcf@...gle.com, kuozhao@...gle.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] gve: Fixes and clean-up
On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 07:42:48PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > one for net (with the first 2
> > patches) and one for net-next (with the cleanup one)?
>
> I've never worked with net and net-next directly.
> If just adding net and net-next after [PATCH] in the subject of the mail,
> yes, I can do it if it helps.
I have a separate tree that I use for sending net patches. I generally
write my patches against linux-next and then postpone sending them until
the next day.
Then I open my patch in mutt.
cd tmp_tree/
../switch_to_net.sh
cat /var/tmp/mutt-speke-1000-511162-9994856746594827871 | patch -p1 --dry-run
If that applies then I "net" to the subject. Otherwise I do a
`../switch_to_net-next.sh` verify it applies and send that.
Once in a while I will have to modify my patches to apply cleanly
against the net tree.
It's a pain in the butt and I get it wrong disappointingly often. I
only do it for networking. Not for linux-wireless. There is another
tree where they complain if you don't add a tree to their patches but I
forget what it is... (I don't use the process for them, only for
networking).
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists