[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231003152030.6615437c@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 15:20:30 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan
<ttoukan.linux@...il.com>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, Maher
Sanalla <msanalla@...dia.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman
<mgorman@...e.de>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky
<leon@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
<edumazet@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri Lelli
<juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Steven Rostedt
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Daniel Bristot de
Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>, Pawel Chmielewski
<pawel.chmielewski@...el.com>, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
Yury Norov <ynorov@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] net: mellanox: drop mlx5_cpumask_default_spread()
On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 06:46:17 -0700 Yury Norov wrote:
> Can you elaborate on the conflicts you see? For me it applies cleanly
> on current master, and with some 3-way merging on latest -next...
We're half way thru the release cycle the conflicts can still come in.
There's no dependency for the first patch. The most normal way to
handle this would be to send patch 1 to the networking tree and send
the rest in the subsequent merge window.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists