> > > > > If we did this, and then chelsio does indeed have some cxgb4 patch > > > that really needs to be on top of the srq series, do we submit them > > > to be merged into linux-rdma with Dave's ACK? Or does Dave pull in > > > the prereq srq series? > > > > Without a k.o account and a PR the patches can only be in one tree at > > a time. > > > > > Or are you saying, if such a patch is inevitable, then the srq > > > series needs to be pulled into both Netdev and linux-rdma. > > > > In this case you'd probably have to wait for the next major kernel > > version to send that series to netdev. > > > > That isn't acceptable, I think. Chelsio cxgb4 changes need to flow regularly. > > > We don't really want to merge netdev only things into rdma exclusively. > > > > > This is tricky. > > > > Yes! > > > > Given Chelsio has iscsi, fcoe, TLS/crypto, and iwarp drivers on top of the NIC > driver, I think this circumstance will happen more going forward. I'm > leaning to a PR from a chelsio-maintained k.o repo... ☹ > I guess an alternative is to submit the cxgb4 changes this cycle, and the iw_cxgb4 changes after those patches land in rdma-next (4.17-rc1 I assume). But this results in 2 release cycles to get the feature in, which is not ideal. (just thinking through the possibilities)... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
