From: Arun Easi <arun.easi@cavium.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: qed, qedi patchset submission
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:53:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1611141256340.28058@mvluser05.qlc.com> (raw)
Hi Martin, David,
This is regarding the submission of the recent patch series we have posted
to linux-scsi and netdev:
[PATCH v2 0/6] Add QLogic FastLinQ iSCSI (qedi) driver.
[PATCH v2 1/6] qed: Add support for hardware offloaded iSCSI.
[PATCH v2 2/6] qed: Add iSCSI out of order packet handling.
[PATCH v2 3/6] qedi: Add QLogic FastLinQ offload iSCSI driver framework.
[PATCH v2 4/6] qedi: Add LL2 iSCSI interface for offload iSCSI.
[PATCH v2 5/6] qedi: Add support for iSCSI session management.
[PATCH v2 6/6] qedi: Add support for data path.
Patches 1 & 2 are "qed" module patches that goes under
drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/ and include/linux/qed/ directory.
- These are the iSCSI enablement changes to the common "qed"
module. There is no dependency for these patches and so
can go independently.
Patches 3, 4, 5 & 6 are the qedi patches that is aimed towards
drivers/scsi/qedi/ directory.
- These are the core qedi changes and is dependent on the
qed changes (invokes qed_XXX functions).
As qed sits in the net tree, the patches are usually submitted via netdev.
Do you have any preference or thoughts on how the "qed" patches be
approached? Just as a reference, our rdma driver "qedr" went through
something similar[1], and eventually "qed" patches were taken by David
in the net tree and "qedr", in the rdma tree (obviously) by Doug L.
Hi David,
For the "qed" enablement sent with the v2 series, we did not prefix the
qed patches with "[PATCH net-next]" prefix, so netdev folks may have
failed to notice/review that, sorry about that. We will send the next (v3)
series with that corrected.
Right now, we are basing the "qed" patches on top of latest net + net-next
tree. FYI, I tried a test merge of net-next/master + qed patches with
"net/master" and I see no conflict in qed.
Regards,
-Arun
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-rdma&m=147509152719831&w=2
next reply other threads:[~2016-11-14 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-14 21:53 Arun Easi [this message]
2016-11-14 23:47 ` qed, qedi patchset submission Martin K. Petersen
2016-11-29 23:11 ` Arun Easi
2016-11-30 16:45 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-11-30 17:15 ` Arun Easi
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=alpine.LRH.2.00.1611141256340.28058@mvluser05.qlc.com \
--to=arun.easi@cavium.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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