lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH 05/13] vmbus: remove per channel state
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 8:39 AM
> To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>; KY Srinivasan
> <kys@microsoft.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; devel@linuxdriverproject.org;
> olaf@aepfle.de; apw@canonical.com; vkuznets@redhat.com;
> jasowang@redhat.com; leann.ogasawara@canonical.com; Stephen
> Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 05/13] vmbus: remove per channel state
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 6:47 AM
> To: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; devel@linuxdriverproject.org;
> olaf@aepfle.de; apw@canonical.com; vkuznets@redhat.com;
> jasowang@redhat.com; leann.ogasawara@canonical.com; Stephen
> Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Stephen Hemminger
> <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] vmbus: remove per channel state
>
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 05:20:35PM -0700, kys@exchange.microsoft.com
> wrote:
> > From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> >
> > The netvsc no longer needs per channel state hook to track receive buffer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
> > Signed-off-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/hyperv.h | 14 --------------
> > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> This patch breaks the build badly, I don't know how it passed anyone's
> build tests :(
>
> The functions are still used in two different files.
>
> I've applied the first 4 patches here, but really, I shouldn't have had
> to bisect down to the offending patch.
>
> ugh.
>
> greg k-h
>
> In the set I submitted was the patch to remove usage of per channel state in
> netvsc.
> KY dropped it, because it already is in net-next. So this patch can wait until
> net-next is merged.
> The current split tree process is a pain and causes slow development cycles

Greg,

Sorry for the confusion; I will be resending the rest of the patches.

Thanks,

K. Y

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-02-12 06:55    [W:0.049 / U:1.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site