On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 09:49:39AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:52:14PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > > > I can enqueue this fix to nf if you like. No need to resend, I can > > > manually apply. > > > > > > Let me know. > > > > It is not critical. I waited weeks the net tree to be > > copied into net-next because it collides with the recent > > "ipvs: make the service replacement more robust" change in > > net tree :) But if a rcu_barrier in the netns cleanup looks > > scary enough you can push it to nf. IMHO, it just adds > > unneeded delay there. > > If it is not critical I would prefer for it to travel through > nf-next. Though I do not feel strongly about this. Will enqueue for nf-next. I'd appreciate if you can recover the tradition of attaching a short evaluation in the cover letter as I do when I send pull requests to David. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
