Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200629211801.C3D7095C0900@us180.sjc.aristanetworks.com>
 <20200629171612.49efbdaa@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
 <CA+HUmGjHQPUh1frfy5E28Om9WTVr0W+UQVDsm99beC_mbTeMog@mail.gmail.com>
 <61CC2BC414934749BD9F5BF3D5D940449874358A@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <CA+HUmGhfxYY5QiwF8_UYbp0TY-k3u+cTYZDSqV1s=SUFnGCn8g@mail.gmail.com> <61CC2BC414934749BD9F5BF3D5D9404498748B57@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <61CC2BC414934749BD9F5BF3D5D9404498748B57@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
From:   Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@arista.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:20:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+HUmGi6D8Ci5fk7vyengJN4qOEH6zz18Kw6B9Us-Kav-78oAg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] igb: reinit_locked() should be called with rtnl_lock
To:     "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
Cc:     "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

>
> So will you be sending a v2 of your patch to include the second fix?

Yes, I am working on it. Just to confirm, v2 should include both fixes, right?

Thanks,
Francesco