Re: [PATCH ipsec 0/3] vti/vti6: minor tweaks + one fix

On 13 May 2014 10:41, Steffen Klassert [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 11:43:39PM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote:

quoted

Hi Steffen,

this series addresses a few issues related to VTI. The first patch fixes
a bug in the vti6 module calling unregister_pernet_device() twice in the
error path. That's probably material for ipsec.git.
The second patch simplifies the error handling path in module init/fini
of vti6. The third patch does the same for vti. Those two are probably
material for ipsec-next.git as we're at -rc5 already. But I leave that
decision to you.

Right, patches two and three should go to ipsec-next. But the second
patch does not apply without the first patch. Please send separate
patchsets for ipsec and ipsec-next in future.

Patch 2 depends on patch 1 because it's a series ;) I explicitly
didn't want to create different patches for ipsec-next because I
wanted to avoid the merge conflicts on your side when ipsec-next would
rebase to/merge a tree which would contain patch 1.
One way to solve it would be to merge ipsec/master into
ipsec-next/master prior to applying patches 2 and 3 -- just as Dave
does with net-next from time to time, i.e. merging net/master. Another
way would be to wait until Dave has merged ipsec/master into
net/master and after that, has merged net/master into net-next. This
way you can merge net-next into ipsec-next and after that apply
patches 2 and 3 without conflicts. Your choice. You know the
interdependencies between these trees better than me. But the first
solution sounds simpler to me. ;)

Mathias