[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a8238354-c36e-4dcb-88ba-1417adc44245@fiberby.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 15:31:39 +0000
From: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@...erby.net>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@...com>,
Ravi Gunasekaran <r-gunasekaran@...com>, Roger Quadros <rogerq@...nel.org>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: flower: validate
control flags
Hi Jiri,
Thank you for the reviews.
On 4/23/24 12:57 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Next time, could you please bundle similar/related patches into
> a patchset?
Sure, I did it per driver to make it easier to handle differences in
get_maintainer output and be able to integrate feedback into later patches
for other drivers, and since the patches could be applied individually.
When I started I through that more drivers had their own trees, wasn't
aware that it was only Intel, and that mlx5-next was dead.
For instance the feedback from Jianbo on mlx5 patch, also went into the
octeontx2-pf patch.
I only have one patch left in the queue now (for qede).
--
Best regards
Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
Network Engineer
Fiberby - AS42541
Powered by blists - more mailing lists