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: <20230323111110.gb4vlaqaf7icymv3@sgarzare-redhat>
Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 12:11:10 +0100
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To:     Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
Cc:     Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...rdevices.ru, oxffffaa@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/2] allocate multiple skbuffs on tx

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:53:40PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>
>
>On 23.03.2023 13:48, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:01:40PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>> Hello Stefano,
>>>
>>> thanks for review!
>>
>> You're welcome!
>>
>>>
>>> Since both patches are R-b, i can wait for a few days, then send this
>>> as 'net-next'?
>>
>> Yep, maybe even this series could have been directly without RFC ;-)
>
>"directly", You mean 'net' tag? Of just without RFC, like [PATCH v5]. In this case
>it will be merged to 'net' right?

Sorry for the confusion. I meant without RFC but with net-next.

Being enhancements and not fixes this is definitely net-next material,
so even in RFCs you can already use the net-next tag, so the reviewer
knows which branch to apply them to. (It's not super important since
being RFCs it's expected that it's not complete, but it's definitely an
help for the reviewer).

Speaking of the RFC, we usually use it for patches that we don't think
are ready to be merged. But when they reach a good state (like this
series for example), we can start publishing them already without the
RFC tag.

Anyway, if you are not sure, use RFC and then when a maintainer has
reviewed them all, surely you can remove the RFC tag.

Hope this helps, at least that's what I usually do, so don't take that
as a strict rule ;-)

Thanks,
Stefano

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ