On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 02:57:15PM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote: > > >To: "Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche@xxxxxxx> > >From: "Bernard Metzler" > >Sent by: linux-rdma-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >Date: 04/23/2019 04:07PM > >Cc: linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/12] SIW: Request for Comments > > > > > >>To: "Bernard Metzler" <bmt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, > >>linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>From: "Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche@xxxxxxx> > >>Date: 04/22/2019 07:03PM > >>Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/12] SIW: Request for Comments > >> > >>On Wed, 2019-04-17 at 17:00 +0200, Bernard Metzler wrote: > >>> We maintain a snapshot of the current code at > >>> > >>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_zrli > >o > >>_softiwarp-2Dfor-2Dlinux-2Drdma.git&d=DwICgQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZO > >g > >>&r=2TaYXQ0T-r8ZO1PP1alNwU_QJcRRLfmYTAgd3QCvqSc&m=B989jL4ShcEiBbB8Fy9 > >d > >>tRLbFiGhqDdi0dbpofDu11I&s=V2AY8c20R6hHajVgPB_OwUGEzRB9fSJDoQQLw-ODV9 > >s > >>&e= > >>> within branch 'siw-for-rdma-next-v7'. > >> > >>Hi Bernard, > >> > >>I had a look at that branch. What I found on that branch (compared > >to > >>Linus' master branch) is the following: > >>* Version 6 of the SIW patch series. > >>* A merge with Linus' v5.1-rc2 tag. > >>* A series of fixes for v6. > >> > >>That is not how patch series should be prepared. I think Jason > >>expects > >>something like the following: > >>* git remote add rdma > >>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rdma/rdma.git > >>* git branch --set-upstream-to=rdma/for-next > >>* git pull --rebase > >> > >>and next run git rebase -i rdma/for-next to apply the fixes to the > >>patches > >>these are intended for. The patches in the branches of your github > >>repo > >>should match what is posted on the linux-rdma mailing list. > >> > >>Thanks, > >> > >>Bart. > > > >Hi Bart, > > > >thanks a lot for clarifying this! And, sorry for the mess on that > >repo. I am going to fix it as suggested. > > > > Things seem to be a little tricky, since rdma/for-next of course > is a moving target. So I cannot rebase siw version 7 (the RFC I > sent last week) to its current status. rdma/for-next evolved > regarding core object management, and some of siw's verbs method > wouldn't fit anymore. Okay, well, if it can't be applied I have to drop it off patchworks, resend something that can be applied please Jason
