From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ossama Othman <ossama.othman@intel.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
matthieu.baerts@tessares.net, mptcp@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mptcp: fix conflict with <netinet/in.h>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 11:16:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220610111607.38b003e1@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d4c74484-da9-8af3-e25b-93de29443840@linux.intel.com>
On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 11:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Mat Martineau wrote:
> This is a minor "fix" to be sure, which I thought did not meet the bar for
> net and therefore submitted for net-next. It's not prep for another
> change, it's something Ossama and I noticed when doing code review for a
> userspace program that included the header. There's no problem with kernel
> compilation, and there's also no issue if the userspace program happens to
> include netinet/in.h before linux/mptcp.h
>
>
> If my threshold for the net branch is too high, I have no objection to
> having this patch applied there and will recalibrate :)
>
> Do you prefer to have no Fixes: tags in net-next, or did that just seem
> ambiguous in this case?
The important point is that the middle ground of marking things as fixes
and at the same time putting them in -next, to still get them
backported but with an extended settling time -- that middle ground
does not exist.
If we look at the patch from the "do we want it backported or not"
perspective I think the answer is yes, hence I'd lean towards net.
If you think it doesn't matter enough for backport - we can drop the
fixes tag and go with net-next. Unfortunately I don't have enough
direct experience to tell how annoying this will be to the user space.
netinet/in.h vs linux/in.h is a mess :(
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-10 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-08 19:19 [PATCH net-next 0/2] mptcp: Header fixups Mat Martineau
2022-06-08 19:19 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] mptcp: fix conflict with <netinet/in.h> Mat Martineau
2022-06-10 5:59 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-06-10 18:00 ` Mat Martineau
2022-06-10 18:16 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-06-10 19:59 ` Mat Martineau
2022-06-08 19:19 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] mptcp: move MPTCPOPT_HMAC_LEN to net/mptcp.h Mat Martineau
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220610111607.38b003e1@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com \
--cc=matthieu.baerts@tessares.net \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossama.othman@intel.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).