+ linux-wireless
Hi Kees,
Kees Cook [off-list ref] writes:
This is the current set of outstanding networking patches to perform
conversions to the new timer interface (rebased to -next). This is not
all expected conversions, but it contains everything needed in networking
to eliminate init_timer(), and all the non-standard setup_*_timer() uses.
So this also includes patches which I had queued for
wireless-drivers-next:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9986253/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9986245/
And looking at patchwork[1] I have even more timer_setup() related
patches from you. It would be really helpful if you could clearly
document to which tree you want the patches to be applied. I don't care
if it's net-next or wireless-drivers-next as long as it's not the both
(meaning that both Dave and me apply the same patch, which would be
bad). The thing is that I really do not have time to figure out for
every patch via which tree it's supposed to go.
For now I'll just drop all your timer_setup() related patches from my
queue and I'll assume Dave will take those. Ok?
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
--
Kalle Valo
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Kalle Valo [off-list ref] wrote:
+ linux-wireless
Hi Kees,
Kees Cook [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
This is the current set of outstanding networking patches to perform
conversions to the new timer interface (rebased to -next). This is not
all expected conversions, but it contains everything needed in networking
to eliminate init_timer(), and all the non-standard setup_*_timer() uses.
So this also includes patches which I had queued for
wireless-drivers-next:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9986253/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9986245/
And looking at patchwork[1] I have even more timer_setup() related
patches from you. It would be really helpful if you could clearly
document to which tree you want the patches to be applied. I don't care
Hi! Sorry about that. It's been a bit tricky to juggle everything.
if it's net-next or wireless-drivers-next as long as it's not the both
(meaning that both Dave and me apply the same patch, which would be
bad). The thing is that I really do not have time to figure out for
every patch via which tree it's supposed to go.
Which split is preferred? I had been trying to separate wireless from
the rest of net (but missed some cases).
For now I'll just drop all your timer_setup() related patches from my
queue and I'll assume Dave will take those. Ok?
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
I guess I'll wait to see what Dave says.
Thanks!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security