From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A1FC433DB for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 17:38:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFB6564F4D for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 17:38:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237005AbhBBRiQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 12:38:16 -0500 Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([85.215.255.24]:31365 "EHLO mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237182AbhBBRey (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 12:34:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1612287059; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=hartkopp.net; h=In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Cc:Date: From:Subject:Sender; bh=d6c9JvZ+ULTnF0wVQPp9B2N8i/b5AB3i6LLcChZtVrg=; b=ikN5N6c1pbjCxVBx0jlO26IOvUsfie7lCbYukAoGojCuRdLbAQKyj8aQHh6FbGJZeC 4Z8eTz2RwOF6XLd7gHfjEIy1kheTRkokj9mVTSgA8FO07zQe2yZTB7W2WXmVFw1hS/Hr MZBvbJEPBOqG6Q83uBoMDr2oRTuTE2DXtMc1e63yWLCnRT5gDzsJLA+drBToZrkgE/64 DDutcNK8EyggjJU+AQX4OKRJJA5l6UNUPicqg+RjsvNIPln+m2CDwKDcgy/yrVTjJOa8 IuOZ6/w9BplVHO1Ug0lrR20U2yR17bSsS+WPYByZrG7fhrBhvj19lrDQxdq4GDH2ZAsl Mnrw== X-RZG-AUTH: ":P2MHfkW8eP4Mre39l357AZT/I7AY/7nT2yrDxb8mjG14FZxedJy6qgO1o3PMaViOoLMJV8h6kk/I" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from [192.168.50.177] by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 47.16.0 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id w076a1x12HUvI3B (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 18:30:57 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND iproute2 5.11] iplink_can: add Classical CAN frame LEN8_DLC support To: David Ahern , Stephen Hemminger Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org References: <20210125104055.79882-1-socketcan@hartkopp.net> <586c2310-17ee-328e-189c-f03aae1735e9@gmail.com> From: Oliver Hartkopp Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 18:30:52 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <586c2310-17ee-328e-189c-f03aae1735e9@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 02.02.21 16:35, David Ahern wrote: > On 2/2/21 3:48 AM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: >> >> Are you sure this patch is correctly assigned to iproute2-next? >> >> IMO it has to be applied to iproute2 as the functionality is already in >> v5.11 which is in rc6 right now. >> > > new features land in iproute2-next just as they do for the kernel with > net-next. > > Patches adding support for kernel features should be sent in the same > development window if you want the iproute2 support to match kernel version. > Oh, I followed the commits from iproute2 until the new include files from (in this case) 5.11 pre rc1 had been updated (on 2020-12-24): https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/network/iproute2/iproute2.git/commit/?id=2953235e61eb672bbdd2de84eb5b91c388f9a9b5 I thought the uapi updates in iproute2 are *always* pulled from the kernel and not from iprout2-next which was new to me. Do you expect patches for iproute2-next when the relevant changes become available in linux-next then? Even though I did not know about iproute2-next the patch is needed for the 5.11 kernel (as written in the subject). Regards, Oliver