Thread (22 messages) 22 messages, 2 authors, 2025-03-14

Re: [PATCH v9 nf 00/15] bridge-fastpath and related improvements

From: Eric Woudstra <hidden>
Date: 2025-03-12 16:21:33
Also in: bridge, linux-arm-kernel, linux-hardening, linux-mediatek, lkml, netfilter-devel


On 3/12/25 12:44 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
Therefore, I suggest you start with a much smaller series with a
carefully selected subset including preparatory patches. I suggest you
start with the software enhancements only. Please, add datapath tests.
Then I will split it in:
1. Separate preparatory patches and small patch-sets that apply
     to the forward-fastpath already.
2. One patch-set that brings the bridge-fastpath with datapath tests.
P.S: You work is important, very important, but maybe there is no need
to Cc so many mailing lists and people, maybe netdev@,
netfilter-devel@ and bridge@ is sufficient.
Ok, but my main question then is which tree should I work in, and
therefore which tag should I give my patches, [nf] or [net-next].
I think it will get more complicated if I split my patch-set and half of
the patches go to [nf] and another half to [net-next].

What do you suggest?
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help