Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. Wei.
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:41:59 +0100> Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in.Does not apply to net-next. [davem@drr net-next]$ git am --signoff bundle-4170-xen.mbox Applying: xen-netfront: frags -> slots in log message Applying: xen-netfront: reduce gso_max_size to account for max TCP header Applying: xen-netback: coalesce slots in TX path and fix regressions error: patch failed: drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c:1548 error: drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c: patch does not apply Patch failed at 0003 xen-netback: coalesce slots in TX path and fix regressions The copy of the patch that failed is found in: /home/davem/src/GIT/net-next/.git/rebase-apply/patch When you have resolved this problem run "git am --resolved". If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am --skip". To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am --abort". Please stop wasting my time.
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 07:09:00PM +0100, David Miller wrote:> From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> > Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:41:59 +0100 > > > Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. > > Does not apply to net-next. > > [davem@drr net-next]$ git am --signoff bundle-4170-xen.mbox > Applying: xen-netfront: frags -> slots in log message > Applying: xen-netfront: reduce gso_max_size to account for max TCP header > Applying: xen-netback: coalesce slots in TX path and fix regressions > error: patch failed: drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c:1548 > error: drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c: patch does not apply > Patch failed at 0003 xen-netback: coalesce slots in TX path and fix regressions > The copy of the patch that failed is found in: > /home/davem/src/GIT/net-next/.git/rebase-apply/patch > When you have resolved this problem run "git am --resolved". > If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am --skip". > To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am --abort". > > Please stop wasting my time.Sorry Dave, I didn''t mean to waste your time. I will rebase my patches and post the really final series. Wei.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-Apr-17 19:31 UTC
Re: [PATCH V6] Bundle fixes for Xen netfront / netback
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 06:41:59PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote:> Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in.Should you put CC: stable@vger.kernel.org on some of them?> > > Wei. > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel >
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 08:31:19PM +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 06:41:59PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > > Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. > > Should you put CC: stable@vger.kernel.org on some of them?I don''t think so: Ian Campbell told me that DaveM would like the patches to go through his tree. Wei.> > > > > > Wei. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xen-devel mailing list > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel > >
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:31:19 -0400> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 06:41:59PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: >> Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. > > Should you put CC: stable@vger.kernel.org on some of them?These patches are targetted at net-next, so that would not be appropriate. If any of this needs to go to -stable, it should have been targetted at ''net'' not ''net-next''.
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 20:43:17 +0100> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 08:31:19PM +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 06:41:59PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: >> > Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. >> >> Should you put CC: stable@vger.kernel.org on some of them? > > I don''t think so: Ian Campbell told me that DaveM would like the patches > to go through his tree.That''s rather irrelevant.
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 10:21:20PM +0100, David Miller wrote:> From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> > Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 20:43:17 +0100 > > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 08:31:19PM +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 06:41:59PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > >> > Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. > >> > >> Should you put CC: stable@vger.kernel.org on some of them? > > > > I don''t think so: Ian Campbell told me that DaveM would like the patches > > to go through his tree. > > That''s rather irrelevant.Sorry I''m still learning the process of doing netdev. If you can straighten it out for me that would be very helpful. The handle I have is: http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=136552034026257&w=2 QUOTE "> This should probably also CC stable@vger.kernel.org DaveM prefers net patches to not do so and he takes care of forwarding patches once he is happy (i.e. after they''ve been in his/Linus'' tree for a bit)." /QUOTE But it seems that Ian got you wrong. Or I misunderstood him. So this patch series is considered both for net-next and stable because it is basement for our future development and we would also like it to get backported to stable. What should I do with it? Should I rebase it against net-next or net? Or should I send out two series against different branches? Furthur question, now that I know there is actually two branches for network related development, should I explicitly point out which branch my series is against in the future? Thank you for your time. :-) Wei.
On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 02:20 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 10:21:20PM +0100, David Miller wrote: > > From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> > > Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 20:43:17 +0100 > > > > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 08:31:19PM +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 06:41:59PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > > >> > Final round of this series. All acked and ready to go in. > > >> > > >> Should you put CC: stable@vger.kernel.org on some of them? > > > > > > I don''t think so: Ian Campbell told me that DaveM would like the patches > > > to go through his tree. > > > > That''s rather irrelevant. > > Sorry I''m still learning the process of doing netdev. If you can > straighten it out for me that would be very helpful. > > The handle I have is: > http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=136552034026257&w=2 > > QUOTE > "> This should probably also CC stable@vger.kernel.org > > DaveM prefers net patches to not do so and he takes care of forwarding > patches once he is happy (i.e. after they''ve been in his/Linus'' tree for > a bit)." > /QUOTE > > But it seems that Ian got you wrong.I based my comment on http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=136029787424755&w=2 but its possible something got lost in translation (in particular the "ask me to queue it up to my -stable todo pile instead" bit").> So this patch series is considered both for net-next and stable because > it is basement for our future development and we would also like it to > get backported to stable.Nevermind future development, we want it in stable because it fixes regressions in the previous XSA-39/CVE-2013-0216+CVE-2013-0217 fixes which went into stable. Ian.