From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 3/3] rcv path changes for vrf traffic Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 19:03:18 -0600 Message-ID: <55763B56.3000503@gmail.com> References: <87eae7a7a03708bda5560a5ea43b0fcac705c80d.1433561681.git.shm@cumulusnetworks.com> <1433793517.4616.4.camel@stressinduktion.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, hadi@mojatatu.com, davem@davemloft.net, stephen@networkplumber.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, gospo@cumulusnetworks.com, jtoppins@cumulusnetworks.com, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com To: Hannes Frederic Sowa , Shrijeet Mukherjee Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:36795 "EHLO mail-ig0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752751AbbFIBDV (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2015 21:03:21 -0400 Received: by igbpi8 with SMTP id pi8so1656306igb.1 for ; Mon, 08 Jun 2015 18:03:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1433793517.4616.4.camel@stressinduktion.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 6/8/15 1:58 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > For rx layer I want to also propose my try: > > [PATCH net-next RFC] net: ipv4: arp: strong end system model semantics by per-interface local table override > I applied only the first 2 patches from Shrijeet and then tried to apply your patch; it doesn't apply. Way too many failures. What branch should it apply too?