From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexei Starovoitov Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] s390/bpf: implement bpf_tail_call JIT support Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:50:56 -0700 Message-ID: <556D4440.5010503@plumgrid.com> References: <1433007731-16992-1-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com> <20150531.213931.282168647572228489.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, daniel@iogearbox.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.220.54]:35487 "EHLO mail-pa0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755785AbbFBFu7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2015 01:50:59 -0400 Received: by padjw17 with SMTP id jw17so53569878pad.2 for ; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:50:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150531.213931.282168647572228489.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 5/31/15 9:39 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Alexei Starovoitov > Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 10:42:08 -0700 > >> This set is for net-next tree. >> >> Patch 3 adds bpf_tail_call() support for s390x JIT. It has >> a dependency on patches 1 and 2 that will also be submitted >> to stable via Martin Schwidefsky. > > In this kind of scenerio, patches #1 and #2 should go via my > tree (somehow), and then when I next merge 'net' into 'net-next' > you can submit patch #3. all makes sense. Just resubmitted #1 and #2 against 'net' with proper 'Fixes' tag.