netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] qede: remove linux/version.h and linux/compiler.h

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: <8a90dca3-af66-5348-72b9-ac49610f22ce@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2023 18:13:16 +0100
From:   Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To:     Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
CC:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Ariel Elior <aelior@...vell.com>,
        Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <kernel@...labora.com>,
        <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] qede: remove linux/version.h and linux/compiler.h

From: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 21:53:48 +0500

> On 3/7/23 9:38 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 06:39:20PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>> On 3/4/23 4:54 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>> On Fri,  3 Mar 2023 23:53:50 +0500 Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>>>> make versioncheck reports the following:
>>>>> ./drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qede/qede.h: 10 linux/version.h not needed.
>>>>> ./drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qede/qede_ethtool.c: 7 linux/version.h not needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> So remove linux/version.h from both of these files. Also remove
>>>>> linux/compiler.h while at it as it is also not being used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
>>>>
>>>> # Form letter - net-next is closed
>>>>
>>>> The merge window for v6.3 has begun and therefore net-next is closed
>>>> for new drivers, features, code refactoring and optimizations.
>>>> We are currently accepting bug fixes only.
>>>>
>>>> Please repost when net-next reopens after Mar 6th.
>>> It is Mar 7th. Please review.
>>
>> I think that the way it works is that you need to repost the patch.
>> Probably with REPOST in the subject if it is unchanged:Sorry, I didn't know. I'll repost it.
> 
>>
>> Subject: [PATCH net-next repost v2] ...
>>
>> Or bumped to v3 if there are changes.
>>
>> Subject: [PATCH net-next v3] ...
>>
>> Also, as per the examples above, the target tree, in this case
>> 'net-next' should be included in the subject.
> I don't know much about net tree and its location. This is why people use

Here[0].

> linux-next for sending patches. I'm not sure about the networking sub

No, people use the corresponding mailing lists to send and repositories
to base their patches on.

> system. Would it be accepted if I send it against linux-next as in [PATCH
> linux-next repost v2]?

No. Please use net-next I provided above. Your subject prefix will be

[PATCH net-next v3]

since you'll have changes (specifying the correct tree).
You can ask git-format-patch to generate it automatically via

`git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' -v3 ...`

> 
> 

One more note: I was participating in reviewing/discussing your first
patch version, so please add all the participants to --cc when you send
next versions. For this particular patch it means Jakub, Simon and me
must be specified explicitly in --cc when you send v3.

[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git/

Thanks,
Olek