netdev - Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 0/8] mlx5 IPsec RoCEv2 support and netdev events fixes in RDMA

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: <20230105122517.235208c3@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 12:25:17 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 0/8] mlx5 IPsec RoCEv2 support and netdev
 events fixes in RDMA

On Thu, 5 Jan 2023 22:12:28 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > PR should be based on Linus's -rcX tag and shouldn't include only this patchset.  
> > 
> > FWIW I don't understand what you mean by this comment.
> > PR should be based on a common ancestor, the -rc tags 
> > are just a convenient shorthand.  
> 
> Linus asked for more than once to use sensible ancestor which is -rc.

I mean.. as I said using -rc tags makes sanity checking the PRs easier,
so definitely encouraged.

I was asking more about the second part of your sentence, what do you
mean by "shouldn't include only this patchset" ?