On 2019/8/20 17:44, Dan Carpenter wrote:

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:25:29AM +0200, Björn Töpel wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 10:59, Dan Carpenter [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:28:26AM +0200, Björn Töpel wrote:

quoted

For future patches: Prefix AF_XDP socket work with "xsk:" and use "PATCH
bpf-next" to let the developers know what tree you're aiming for.

There are over 300 trees in linux-next.  It impossible to try remember
everyone's trees.  No one else has this requirement.

Net/bpf are different, and I wanted to point that out to lessen the
burden for the maintainers. It's documented in:

Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst.
Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst

Ah...  I hadn't realized that BPF patches were confusing to Dave.

I actually do keep track of net and net-next.  I do quite a bit of extra
stuff for netdev patches.  So what about if we used [PATCH] for bpf and
[PATCH net] and [PATCH net-next] for networking?

I will do that.

bpf-next is a good choice.

regards,
dan carpenter

.