Hi,
Here are the changes from v4:
patch 2:
- sort headers in btf_dumper.c
- remove extra parentheses
- include asm/byteorder.h
- compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined
Thanks,
Okash
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:08:03 -0700, Okash Khawaja wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here are the changes from v4:
>
> patch 2:
>
> - sort headers in btf_dumper.c
> - remove extra parentheses
> - include asm/byteorder.h
> - compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined
Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Thanks!
On 07/12/2018 05:30 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:08:03 -0700, Okash Khawaja wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here are the changes from v4:
>>
>> patch 2:
>>
>> - sort headers in btf_dumper.c
>> - remove extra parentheses
>> - include asm/byteorder.h
>> - compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined
>
> Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Hmm, strange, by accident I just noticed that only your bpf fix ever made
it to patchwork, Okash.
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?submitter=74458&state=*
Potentially because you've sent with attachments which got dropped on
the list?
Could you properly submit the series again, and retaining Jakub's Reviewed-by
tag to the patches?
Thanks,
Daniel
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:49:01PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 07/12/2018 05:30 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:08:03 -0700, Okash Khawaja wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Here are the changes from v4:
> >>
> >> patch 2:
> >>
> >> - sort headers in btf_dumper.c
> >> - remove extra parentheses
> >> - include asm/byteorder.h
> >> - compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
>
> Hmm, strange, by accident I just noticed that only your bpf fix ever made
> it to patchwork, Okash.
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_project_netdev_list_-3Fsubmitter-3D74458-26state-3D-2A&d=DwICaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=4wHrS7MHHFLZe_WCJwRVhA&m=wkiBQFYWPyiN9WONHLY0WiZxcOwNRhXaMMLIE551mCA&s=RggQzClRdkwawboGLPgPXHOdUtYffxeOwlcBlFru-P4&e=
>
> Potentially because you've sent with attachments which got dropped on
> the list?
interesting because i send all patches using quilt mail, the same way i
sent bpf fix. i can try git-send-email.
also i dropped Acked-by as i changed patch versions. is it common thing
to do? or should i keep the Acked-by?
>
> Could you properly submit the series again, and retaining Jakub's Reviewed-by
> tag to the patches?
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
On 07/13/2018 11:35 PM, Okash Khawaja wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:49:01PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 07/12/2018 05:30 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:08:03 -0700, Okash Khawaja wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Here are the changes from v4:
>>>>
>>>> patch 2:
>>>>
>>>> - sort headers in btf_dumper.c
>>>> - remove extra parentheses
>>>> - include asm/byteorder.h
>>>> - compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
>>
>> Hmm, strange, by accident I just noticed that only your bpf fix ever made
>> it to patchwork, Okash.
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_project_netdev_list_-3Fsubmitter-3D74458-26state-3D-2A&d=DwICaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=4wHrS7MHHFLZe_WCJwRVhA&m=wkiBQFYWPyiN9WONHLY0WiZxcOwNRhXaMMLIE551mCA&s=RggQzClRdkwawboGLPgPXHOdUtYffxeOwlcBlFru-P4&e=
>>
>> Potentially because you've sent with attachments which got dropped on
>> the list?
> interesting because i send all patches using quilt mail, the same way i
> sent bpf fix. i can try git-send-email.
>
> also i dropped Acked-by as i changed patch versions. is it common thing
> to do? or should i keep the Acked-by?
Depends on whether the pieces that have been ACKed changed in the
meantime or not.
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 12:35:03AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 07/13/2018 11:35 PM, Okash Khawaja wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:49:01PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> >> On 07/12/2018 05:30 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:08:03 -0700, Okash Khawaja wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Here are the changes from v4:
> >>>>
> >>>> patch 2:
> >>>>
> >>>> - sort headers in btf_dumper.c
> >>>> - remove extra parentheses
> >>>> - include asm/byteorder.h
> >>>> - compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined
> >>>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> Hmm, strange, by accident I just noticed that only your bpf fix ever made
> >> it to patchwork, Okash.
> >>
> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_project_netdev_list_-3Fsubmitter-3D74458-26state-3D-2A&d=DwICaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=4wHrS7MHHFLZe_WCJwRVhA&m=wkiBQFYWPyiN9WONHLY0WiZxcOwNRhXaMMLIE551mCA&s=RggQzClRdkwawboGLPgPXHOdUtYffxeOwlcBlFru-P4&e=
> >>
> >> Potentially because you've sent with attachments which got dropped on
> >> the list?
> > interesting because i send all patches using quilt mail, the same way i
> > sent bpf fix. i can try git-send-email.
> >
> > also i dropped Acked-by as i changed patch versions. is it common thing
> > to do? or should i keep the Acked-by?
>
> Depends on whether the pieces that have been ACKed changed in the
> meantime or not.
right, thanks. makes sense :)
regarding patches not showing in patchwork, i've checked that the
patches are not attachments. is it going to be a problem with
upstreaming if they don't show up in patchwork? should i send patches
again?