On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:39:53AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 08:54:06 +0100 > Greg KH <g...@kroah.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 01:06:46PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > > > From: Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> > > > Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:04:05 -0800 > > > > > > > I have a working set of patches to enable NAPI in the netvsc driver. > > > > The problem is that it requires a set of patches to vmbus layer as well. > > > > Since vmbus patches have been going through char-misc-next tree rather > > > > than net-next, it is difficult to stage these. > > > > > > > > How about if I send the vmbus patches through normal driver-devel > > > > upstream > > > > and during the 4.10 merge window send the last 3 patches for NAPI for > > > > linux-net > > > > tree to get into 4.10? > > > > > > Another option is that the char-misc-next folks create a branch with just > > > the commits you need for NAPI, I pull that into net-next, and then you > > > can submit the NAPI changes to me. > > > > I can easily do that, or I have no problem with the vmbus changes going > > through the net-next tree, if they are sane (i.e. let me review them > > please...) Which ever is easier for the networking developers, their > > tree is much crazier than the tiny char-misc tree is :) > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > I just want the least pain and the least overhead process. Waiting two > releases > and trying to deal with merge conflicts is a pain. Also it makes life harder > with distro backports etc.
I totally agree. Post the patches and let's see what they look like and then we can argue who's tree they should go through :)
