On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:36:22 +0000 Ramsay, Lincoln wrote: > > (Next time please include in the subject the tree that you're targetting > > the patch) > > I guess you mean like [PATCH master v5] ? Should I be targeting > something other than the master branch on the main git repo? > (https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git)
In this case the patch will be merged into the networking tree, and then travel downstream to Linus. So you want to target this tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/ IOW [PATCH net v5]. > > please add a From: line at the beginning of the mail which matches > > the signoff (or use git-send-email, it'll get it right). > > Sure. > > > Ah, one more thing, this is the correct fixes tag, right? > > Fixes: 018423e90bee ("net: ethernet: aquantia: Add ring support code") > > Please add it right before the signoff line. > > I didn't quite understand this header... but yeah, I guess that's the > commit that adds the fast path I am removing. Yup, it points to the oldest revision of the code where the bug is present. In your case oldest revision where: When performing IPv6 forwarding, there is an expectation that SKBs will have some headroom. When forwarding a packet from the aquantia driver, this does not always happen, triggering a kernel warning. > > > Align continuations of the lines under '(' like: > > > > I am only changing the leading indent. Am I still expected to satisfy the > > patch checker? > > > > The current patch is very clear about what is happening if you do a diff -w > > but if I start > > changing other things to satisfy the checker, that goes away. > > Some of the patch checker complaints are only leading whitespace > (obviously not a problem for diff -w), but 2 of them involve actual > changes (changing , to ; and moving the first argument from the line > below to the line above). I don't think it'll make a huge difference for the review-ability of this change to heed checkpatch's warnings here.
