Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 06:15:21AM +0000, Ping-Ke Shih wrote: > > Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > > > Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > > > >> Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>> Embedding net_device into structures prohibits the usage of flexible > > > >>> arrays in the net_device structure. For more details, see the discussion > > > >>> at [1]. > > > >>> > > > >>> Un-embed the net_device from the private struct by converting it > > > >>> into a pointer. Then use the leverage the new alloc_netdev_dummy() > > > >>> helper to allocate and initialize dummy devices. > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240229225910.79e224cf@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > >>> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> > > > >> I think this patch should go via net-next tree, because wireless-next tree > > > >> doesn't have patch of dummy devices yet. > > > >> > > > >> Acked-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > FWIW I sent the wireless-next pull request yesterday and once it pulled > > > > we will fast forward wireless-next to latest net-next. > > > > > > Oh, I just realised that this is not CCed to netdev so their patchwork > > > won't even see the patch. Ping, I recommend that you wait for the > > > dependency commits to trickle down to your tree and then apply the > > > patch. That's the simplest approach and no need to resend anything. > > > > Okay. If we don't hurry to get this patch merged, I will apply this patch > > to my tree. > > There is no hurry to get this patch merged. I merged this patch today. > > Out of curiosity, why don't you rebase your tree to net-next/linux-next > frequently? My tree goes to wireless-next, so I think it should be always based on wireless-next. Once wirelss-next rebase (ff-merge) net-next, my tree will have them also.
