From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] iproute2 2.6.20-070313 Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:05:59 +0100 Message-ID: <45F7E527.6030307@trash.net> References: <20070313151549.332004c9@freekitty> <200703141223.48927.arekm@maven.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl To: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:37165 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161179AbXCNMGU (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2007 08:06:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200703141223.48927.arekm@maven.pl> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > This patch > > http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg27506.html > > didn't make into upstream linux kernel it seems. As mentioned in the changelog, its in 2.6.19. > The question is - are patches adding some functionality that's not in upstream > kernel accepted? > > There is one wrr patch for iproute floating around that I'm thinking about. Last time I looked at the WRR patch it was a huge mess and used architecture dependant types in the netlink messages. Unless someone fixed this, adding support to iproute is a bad idea since in case it would get merged compatibility would break.