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:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:23:36 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To:     Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@gmail.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>,
        Anirudh Rayabharam <mail@anirudhrb.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
        Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com>,
        Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@huawei.com>,
        Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk>,
        syzbot+44d53c7255bb1aea22d2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
        YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: hso: fix error handling code of
 hso_create_net_device
Message-ID: <YPkc+HNUPcXQglpG@hovoldconsulting.com>
References: <20210714091327.677458-1-mudongliangabcd@gmail.com>
 <YPfOZp7YoagbE+Mh@kroah.com>
 <CAD-N9QVi=TvS6sM+jcOf=Y5esECtRgTMgdFW+dqB-R_BuNv6AQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YPgwkEHzmxSPSLVA@hovoldconsulting.com>
 <YPhOcwiEUW+cchJ1@hovoldconsulting.com>
 <CAD-N9QVD6BcWVRbsXJ8AV0nMmCetpE6ke0wWxogXpwihnjTvRA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAD-N9QVD6BcWVRbsXJ8AV0nMmCetpE6ke0wWxogXpwihnjTvRA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 01:32:48PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:42 AM Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> wrote:

> > > A version of this patch has already been applied to net-next.
> >
> > That was apparently net (not net-next).
> >
> > > No idea which version that was or why the second patch hasn't been
> > > applied yet.
> 
> It seems because I only sent the 1/2 patch in the v3. Also due to
> this, gregkh asked me to resend the whole patchset again.

Yeah, it's hard to keep track of submissions sometimes, especially if
not updating the whole series.

> > > Dongliang, if you're resending something here it should first be rebased
> > > on linux-next (net-next).
> >
> > And the resend of v3 of both patches has now also been applied to
> > net-next.
> >
> > Hopefully there are no conflicts between v2 and v3 but we'll see soon.
> 
> You mean you apply a v2 patch into one tree? This thread already
> contains the v3 patch, and there is no v2 patch in the mailing list
> due to one incomplete email subject.
> 
> BTW, v2->v3 only some label change due to naming style.

Ok, I can't keep track of this either. I just noticed that this patch
shows up in both net (for 5.14):

	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/?id=a6ecfb39ba9d7316057cea823b196b734f6b18ca

and net-next (for 5.15):

	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git/commit/?id=788e67f18d797abbd48a96143511261f4f3b4f21

The net one was applied on the 15th and the net-next one yesterday. 

Judging from a quick look it appears to be the same diff so no damage
done.

Johan