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 EB898C12D; Fri, 5 May 2023 23:47:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56739C433EF; Fri, 5 May 2023 23:47:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1683330436; bh=NZ7URjmvoWTcc6qha6e9dsNrE0AhjdKFqtTbNb1bDSE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=feE9cetjXP9q+fs/AOT45dpGVUR4CbIgdOEQ/E/8DNiPbgVkxMdQlJYaSPjV9JInv dDUHokT9gJGYnAUHD7EKr2hlV/2rhdRQy2BSfhkkVOoYGZLgqkFM/8+lTlO+/tLiS2 6uL1vIOGTDN6PJ41NsEv2mQgI9ecGcAzxcHNZG8oQ8qTuo2QD9KGd4HVaN4J+zv4JY ISB0nDiiMUipCoXGL9Nh0hzgSoiIZV8rOvfCrtCloMlJIPJU7VWcKypiL1b77KxuWc K0DfN+S+bA7yM3LoPSEzBJ66eUeuSRNWE3DoB4+j2kDpgfHF3JMNvO+tlEkK6v6rXb SmMmxu346XBgw== Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 16:47:15 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Chuck Lever Cc: kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org, dan.carpenter@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Bug fixes for net/handshake Message-ID: <20230505164715.55a12c77@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <168321371754.16695.4217960864733718685.stgit@oracle-102.nfsv4bat.org> <20230505133918.3c7257e8@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 5 May 2023 19:16:40 -0400 Chuck Lever wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 01:39:18PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Thu, 04 May 2023 11:24:12 -0400 Chuck Lever wrote: > > > I plan to send these as part of a 6.4-rc PR. > > > > Can you elaborate? You'll send us the same code as PR? > > I'm about to send the first batch of fixes to Linus, > > I was going to apply this series. > > Since I am listed as a maintainer/supporter of net/handshake, I > assumed I can and should be sending changes through nfsd or some > other repo I can commit to. > > netdev@ is also listed in MAINTAINERS, so I Cc'd you all on this > series. I did not intend for you to be responsible for merging the > series. We'll need to agree on a workflow going forward. Let me talk to DaveM and Paolo -- with NFS being the main user taking it via your trees is likely fine. But if it's a generic TLS handshake and other users will appear - netdev trees may be a more natural central point :S DaveM and Paolo are more familiar with existing cases of similar nature (rxrpc?).. > Since you had some review questions about one of the patches, > maybe that patch should not be merged at this time by either of us. Right, I noticed the cover message first then started looking more in depth at the code :)