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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <0346d5dd-bcb8-1bd9-6943-2c9d83587364@arinc9.com> Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 16:37:28 +0300 From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com> To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> Cc: Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>, Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>, DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>, Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Richard van Schagen <richard@...terhints.com>, Richard van Schagen <vschagen@...com>, Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>, Bartel Eerdekens <bartel.eerdekens@...stell8.be>, erkin.bozoglu@...ont.com, mithat.guner@...ont.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/30] net: dsa: mt7530: improve, trap BPDU & LLDP, and prefer CPU port On 22.05.2023 15:25, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 03:15:02PM +0300, arinc9.unal@...il.com wrote: >> Hello! >> >> This patch series simplifies the code, improves the logic of the switch >> hardware support, traps LLDP frames and BPDUs for MT7530, MT7531, and >> MT7988 SoC switches, and introduces the preferring local CPU port >> operation. > > Hi Arınç > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html > > says: > > Avoid sending series longer than 15 patches. Larger series takes > longer to review as reviewers will defer looking at it until they > find a large chunk of time. A small series can be reviewed in a > short time, so Maintainers just do it. As a result, a sequence of > smaller series gets merged quicker and with better review coverage. > > Given you description above, it sounds like this could easily be split > into smaller patch series. Later patches require the prior ones to apply properly. I can submit the first 15 patches, then the remaining once the first submission is applied. Would that suit you? Arınç
Powered by blists - more mailing lists