netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/5] New NDO methods ndo_hwtstamp

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: <CAP5jrPE8rriDGVrXwszj8DrrGvmRaqnbRzWuCTfhpt4g9G9FLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 May 2023 22:35:05 -0600
From:   Max Georgiev <glipus@...il.com>
To:     Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, vladimir.oltean@....com,
        richardcochran@...il.com, gerhard@...leder-embedded.com,
        thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com,
        Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/5] New NDO methods ndo_hwtstamp_get/set

On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 1:45 PM Vadim Fedorenko
<vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> On 28.04.2023 15:14, Max Georgiev wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 2:11 AM Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 22:57:27 -0600
> >> Max Georgiev <glipus@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sorry, I'm still learning the kernel patch communication rules.
> >>> Thank you for guiding me here.
> >>
> >> Also, each Linux merging subtree can have its own rules.
> >> I also, was not aware of net special merging rules:
> >> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 2:43 AM Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 22:00:43 -0600
> >>>> Max Georgiev <glipus@...il.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for giving it a try!
> >>>>> I'll drop the RFC tag starting from the next iteration.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry I didn't know the net-next submission rules. In fact keep the RFC tag
> >>>> until net-next open again.
> >>>> http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Your patch series don't appear in the cover letter thread:
> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230423032437.285014-1-glipus@gmail.com/
> >>>> I don't know if it comes from your e-mail or just some issue from lore but
> >>>> could you check it?
> >>>
> >>> Could you please elaborate what's missing in the cover letter?
> >>> Should the cover letter contain the latest version of the patch
> >>> stack (v4, then v5, etc.) and some description of the differences
> >>> between the patch versions?
> >>> Let me look up some written guidance on this.
> >>
> >> I don't know how you send your patch series but when you look on your e-mail
> >> thread the patches are not present:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230423032437.285014-1-glipus@gmail.com/
> >>
> >> It is way easier to find your patches when you have all the patches of the
> >> series in the e-mail thread.
> >>
> >
> > Aha, I see the problem now. I guess it has something to do with "--in-reply-to"
> > git send-email optio or similar options.
> >
> >> Here for example they are in the thread:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230406173308.401924-1-kory.maincent@bootlin.com/
> >>
> >> Do you use git send-email?
> >
> > Yes, I use "git format-patch" to generate individual patch files for
> > every patch in the
> > stack, and then I use "git send-email" to send out these patches on-by-one.
> >
>
> The problem is, as Köry has mentioned already, in sending patches one-by-one.
> You can provide a directory with patches to git send-email and it will take all
> of them at once. You can try it with --dry-run and check that all pacthes have
> the same In-Reply-To and References headers.

So the best practice for sending patch stacks is to run "git
send-email ..." against
a folder containing the freshly generated patch files!
Thank you for the guidance!

>
> > Is there a recommended way to send out stacks of patches?
>