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;
Date:   Fri, 2 Jul 2021 11:33:47 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc:     Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@google.com>, csully@google.com,
        sagis@google.com, jonolson@google.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        kuba@kernel.org, awogbemila@google.com, willemb@google.com,
        yangchun@google.com, bcf@google.com, kuozhao@google.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] gve: Fixes and clean-up
Message-ID: <20210702083347.GU2040@kadam>
References: <cover.1625118581.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
 <CAErkTsQLP9_y-Am3MN-O4vZXe3cTKHfYMwkFk-9YWWPLAQM1cw@mail.gmail.com>
 <29632746-3234-1991-040d-3c0dfb3b3acb@wanadoo.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <29632746-3234-1991-040d-3c0dfb3b3acb@wanadoo.fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 07:42:48PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > one for net (with the first 2
> > patches) and one for net-next (with the cleanup one)?
> 
> I've never worked with net and net-next directly.
> If just adding net and net-next after [PATCH] in the subject of the mail,
> yes, I can do it if it helps.

I have a separate tree that I use for sending net patches.  I generally
write my patches against linux-next and then postpone sending them until
the next day.

Then I open my patch in mutt.
cd tmp_tree/
../switch_to_net.sh
cat /var/tmp/mutt-speke-1000-511162-9994856746594827871 | patch -p1 --dry-run
If that applies then I "net" to the subject.  Otherwise I do a
`../switch_to_net-next.sh` verify it applies and send that.

Once in a while I will have to modify my patches to apply cleanly
against the net tree.

It's a pain in the butt and I get it wrong disappointingly often.  I
only do it for networking.  Not for linux-wireless.  There is another
tree where they complain if you don't add a tree to their patches but I
forget what it is...  (I don't use the process for them, only for
networking).

regards,
dan carpenter