On 15/12/2024 23:12, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 08:25:44 +0200 Tariq Toukan wrote:
What do you expect we'll do with this series?
If you expect it to be set to Awaiting Upstream - could you make sure
that the cover letter has "mlx5-next" in the subject? That will makes
it easier to automate in patchwork.
The relevant patches have mlx5-next in their topic.
Should the cover letter as well?
What about other non-IFC patches, keep them with net-next?
If you expect the series to be applied / merged - LMK, I can try
to explain why that's impossible..
The motivation is to avoid potential conflicts with rdma trees.
AFAIK this is the agreed practice and is being followed for some time...
If not, what's the suggested procedure then?
How do you suggest getting these IFC changes to both net and rdma trees?
You can post just the mlx5-next patches (preferably) or the combined
set (with mlx5-next in the cover letter tag). Wait a day or two (normal
review period, like netdev maintainers would when applying to
net-next). Apply the mlx5-next patches to mlx5-next. Send us a pull
request with just the mlx5-next stuff.
Done.
Post the net-next patches which depend on mlx5-next interface changes.
We can count this as the posting, so feel free to apply patch 1 to
mlx5-next and send the PR.
Done.
Let me know of any issue.
Thanks for your help.
