From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: marcelo.leitner@gmail.com Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 15:44:06 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net 0/5] sctp: some fixes of prsctp polices Message-Id: <20160928154406.GB4008@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: References: <20160928.081303.661512609700070565.davem@davemloft.net> <20160928.111716.1982951742537758888.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20160928.111716.1982951742537758888.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: David Miller Cc: lucien.xin@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, vyasevich@gmail.com, daniel@iogearbox.net On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:17:16AM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Xin Long > Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 20:35:40 +0800 > > >> > >>> This patchset is to improve some codes about prsctp polices, and also > >>> to fix some issues. > >>> > >>> v1->v2: > >>> - wrap the check of chunk->sent_count in a macro: > >>> sctp_chunk_retransmitted in patch 2/5. > >> > >> This series is a mix of bug fixes (patch #1) which should be targetting > >> 'net' and simplifications/cleanups (patch #2-5) which should be targetting > >> 'net-next'. > >> > >> Please do not mix things up like this, and submit patches targetting > >> the appropriate tree. > >> > > understand, I wanted to divide them. > > but this patchset is special, the following patches > > depend on patch 1/5. > > That doesn't matter. This happens all the time. > > The way you handle this is you submit patch #1 targetting 'net' and > wait for it to get into 'net' and propagate into 'net-next'. When > that happens you can submit patches #2-5 as a second patch series > targetting 'net-next'. Thanks for your patience for explaining this, David, appreciated. Marcelo