From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F06461EEA3C for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 19:48:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750708119; cv=none; b=iTFYsZwAWSwetIcNjjRFBBWApo1OR+g/aNK9If9qxasAu4Squ/YUQ9Nql2/xkUXtPRi3+LFjdt1kgl8TB9dJId/opdwmCnvoF9/iIishDKfv0YrMlVEgKGVzOW9vf5oy7cOk59dErj1CUsr+7DMxKKU9xf91WAfz1GNOcQ/nDu4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750708119; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vVEJ9Wn4oNfwt3PBcmaEB9fxwWekDOz1WpOnu5uMIFo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=HRk97yxlg6zjSdBp3lQzAATAaU8sjhG58qc0Q2ME3bPuYtHGK2z7EIuTBz9c+3CAL0RpsjVojT7EiYvBP+ik8fNn/PmMeSr1f266N1i+ZEWLPuWlIWLRbkd0pnGdtoklPToy2Oh6GG3bVtc7PJ+fy7iIPClXtKtlp76TYFf45gU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=MHfe0j5j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="MHfe0j5j" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5AB53C4CEEA; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 19:48:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1750708117; bh=vVEJ9Wn4oNfwt3PBcmaEB9fxwWekDOz1WpOnu5uMIFo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MHfe0j5jRU8Z7Aih9crIhjK4xafZ3u06OZQIXRH2bdgzp4oh8poYoeCN5bXYWG91g wkhgObuCCoNT25UFUePg4nJqpxe6/OKR+X9JKj3GAnsc7/511jER7TLVVkVXqRUHcM Q8MN7NBfqvbv3SAtGkIyatp1U9+lXPRcpCondxN6vt8X/BxYO5PcNlvy9ERoEFYAtq iOpOXGXhgsI5fY887cVI6k6nAbx9qdQzokIidpUAuwozn/aK94v3FRm4T0bGcMGlE8 JpfAEb6j/8qnWLrFtTl+duiIOOtibbJk8vaunwOirYPQemjnBseJapoi5k2divW21j Kde48/40LuGRA== Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 15:48:35 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Steve French Cc: Stefan Metzmacher , Tom Talpey , linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, David Howells Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] smb: client: let smbd_post_send_iter() respect the peers max_send_size and transmit all data Message-ID: References: <8ecf5dc585af7abb37f3fabac6eb0f9f3273da85.1750264849.git.metze@samba.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 12:28:56PM -0500, Steve French wrote: >Checkpatch will complain if you put a diff in the description so I >suspect a link in the mainline patch description to the stable >backported version of the patch is better than a diff in the >description. > >Sasha, >What is your preference for how to send a patch to mainline, that will >not apply to stable, but a rebased version of patch is available for >stable? Should the upstream patch have link to the stable rebased >version? or just handle it as followup on the stable mailing list? If you want us to not apply something, mark it with: Cc: # reason goes here, and must be present And just send a backport to stable@ -- Thanks, Sasha