Message-ID: <SJ0PR84MB208867DD3FAFA15BE65A5640D8632@SJ0PR84MB2088.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 22:53:04 +0000
From: "Muggeridge, Matt" <matt.muggeridge2@....com>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "dsahern@...nel.org"
	<dsahern@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: Submitted a patch, got error "Patch does not apply to net-next-0"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
> Sent: Friday, 20 September 2024 6:58 AM
> To: Muggeridge, Matt <matt.muggeridge2@....com>;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Submitted a patch, got error "Patch does not apply to net-next-0"
> 
> On 19.09.2024 22:30, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, 19 September 2024 3:57 PM
> >> To: Muggeridge, Matt <matt.muggeridge2@....com>;
> >> netdev@...r.kernel.org
> >> Subject: Re: Submitted a patch, got error "Patch does not apply to net-next-
> 0"
> >>
> >
> > Thankyou for your detailed and considerate reply, Heiner. As a new
> submitter, I was trying hard to comply with all the documented process.
> >
> >> On 19.09.2024 04:23, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> First time submitter and it seems I did something wrong, as I got
> >>> the error
> >> "Patch does not apply to net-next-0". I suspected it was complaining
> >> about a missing end-of-line, so I resubmitted and get the error
> >> "Patch does not apply to net-next-1". So now I'm unsure how to correct
> this.
> >>>
> >>> My patch is: Netlink flag for creating IPv6 Default Routes
> >>
> (https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/SJ0PR84MB2088B1
> >>
> B93C75A4AAC5B90490D8632@...PR84MB2088.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLO
> >> OK.COM/).
> >>>
> >>> I followed the instructions at
> >> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.12/networking/netdev-FAQ.html.
> >>>
> >>> Here's my local repo:
> >>>
> >>> $ git remote -v
> >>> origin
> >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
> >>> (fetch) origin
> >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
> >>> (push)
> >>>
> >>> After committing my changes, I ran:
> >>>
> >>> $ git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' -1 95c6e5c898d3
> >>>
> >>> It produced the file "0001-Netlink-flag-for-creating-IPv6-Default-
> >> Routes.patch".  I emailed the contents of that file to this list.
> >>>
> >>> How do I correct this?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Matt.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> There's few issues with your submission:
> >> - net-next is closed currently. There's a section in the FAQ
> >> explaining when and why it's closed.
> >
> > To clarify, do I wait for the "rc1" tag before submitting?
> >
> It will be announced on the netdev list when net-next opens again.
> If this sounds too cumbersome, you can check the net-next status here:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://patchwork.hopto.org/net-
> next.html__;!!NpxR!kPJj3xiMZkDcz4C-
> GtjGv7dNm1tV6v6baQvsE6jIaXauxoaswioYtr35gtAnIVPzSN8KUW0Y10weLs
> 9mESqck8Y$
> 
> > FWIW, I read that section, examined the torvalds git repo and saw that
> > it had created a tag for v6.11. I presumed that meant that 6.11 is
> > closed and the tree was open for 6.12 work. I also noted there were
> > other net-next submissions and took that as further evidence the tree
> > was open. Also, the top-of-tree has this commit message, which I took
> > as evidence that 6.12 was open:
> >
> > Merge tag 'net-next-6.12' of
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next
> >> - Please only one version of a patch per day
> >
> > Understood.
> >
> >> - Your commit message states that the patch fixes something. So you
> >> should add a Fixes tag.
> >
> > My patch is in a bit of a grey area. Some would call it a bug fix,
> > others would call it new functionality. My patch extends the netlink
> > API with some functionality that has previously been overlooked.
> > Indeed, when there are multiple default routers in an IPv6 network it
> > is expected to provide resiliency in the event a router becomes
> > unreachable. Instead, when using systemd-networkd as the network
> > manager you get instability, where some connections will fail and
> > others can succeed. So, it fixes a network infrastructure problem for
> > systemd- networkd by extending the netlink API with a new flag.
> >
> > I'm happy to be guided on this. Would you like to see it submitted to
> > net as a bugfix, or net-next as new functionality?
> >
> To me it looks more like a fix, in addition the change is rather simple.
> However this is something I'd leave to the net maintainers to decide.
> The tricky part will be to find out which change this fixes (for the Fixes tag).
> By the way: You sent the patch to the netdev list only and missed the
> maintainers. The get_maintainers script gives you the mail addresses.
> 
> >>   If applicable also cc the patch to stable.
> >>
> >> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.
> >> rst
> >> - If the fixed change isn't in net-next only, your patch should be
> >> based on and tagged "net".
> >
> > Understood. I chose net-next as new functionality, but if you feel
> > this should go in net, then I'll resubmit to net.
> >
> >> - Patch title should be prefixed ipv6 or net/ipv6. Not sure which is
> >> preferred, both are common.
> >>   See change history of net/ipv6/route.c
> >
> > Got it. Yes, I see what you mean. Some have net/ipv6 and others ipv6
> > and a few other variants. I will prefix mine with net/ipv6.
> >
> > Thanks again!
> > Matt.
> >

> > I'm happy to be guided on this. Would you like to see it submitted to
> > net as a bugfix, or net-next as new functionality?
> However this is something I'd leave to the net maintainers to decide.

Dave Miller and David Ahern are listed as maintainers.

To the two Daves, would you prefer to see this submitted to net-next or net?

Kind regards,
Matt.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists