From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] net/hsr: Add support for the High-availability Seamless Redundancy protocol (HSRv0) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:03:05 -0800 Message-ID: <1383602585.28651.10.camel@joe-AO722> References: <527167C7.4030305@xdin.com> <1383164122.9435.41.camel@joe-AO722> <5277F6D6.9040807@xdin.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , David Miller , Stephen Hemminger , Javier Boticario , "balferreira@googlemail.com" , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas?= Molina =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mu=F1oz?= To: Arvid Brodin Return-path: Received: from smtprelay0222.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.222]:60143 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751155Ab3KDWDL (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Nov 2013 17:03:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5277F6D6.9040807@xdin.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2013-11-04 at 20:34 +0100, Arvid Brodin wrote: > On 2013-10-30 21:15, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 21:10 +0100, Arvid Brodin wrote: > >> High-availability Seamless Redundancy ("HSR") provides instant failover > >> redundancy for Ethernet networks. It requires a special network topology where > >> all nodes are connected in a ring (each node having two physical network > >> interfaces). It is suited for applications that demand high availability and > >> very short reaction time. > > > > Thanks Arvid. Maybe add a MAINTAINERS entry too? > > Something like this? Yes, with a nit below: > S: Maintained > F: drivers/net/usb/hso.c > > +HSR NETWORK PROTOCOL > +M: Arvid Brodin > +L: netdev@vger.kernel.org > +S: Maintained > +F: net/hsr/* Using F: net/hsr/ will allow any subdirectories to also be under the same "Maintained" block. > This would indicate that people should CC me when they send patches or find bugs, > and that I should review the patch within a couple of weeks and get back to the > sender and the list with my comments, right? Just making sure I understand what > would be expected of me. > > And where should the MAINTAINERS patch go - to netdev or to lkml? I think netdev with lkml cc'd.