Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
To:     David Gow <davidgow@google.com>, Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        rafael@kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
        mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>, mptcp@lists.linux.dev
References: <cover.1618388989.git.npache@redhat.com>
 <0fa191715b236766ad13c5f786d8daf92a9a0cf2.1618388989.git.npache@redhat.com>
 <e26fbcc8-ba3e-573a-523d-9c5d5f84bc46@tessares.net>
 <CABVgOSm9Lfcu--iiFo=PNLCWCj4vkxqAqO0aZT9B2r3Kw5Fhaw@mail.gmail.com>
 <b57a1cc8-4921-6ed5-adb8-0510d1918d28@tessares.net>
 <CABVgOS=QDATYk3nn1jLHhVRh7rXoTp1+jQhUE5pZq8P9M0VpUA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@tessares.net>
Message-ID: <8b8aecaa-2651-2401-e5ad-499b2c920c6d@tessares.net>
Date:   Sat, 17 Apr 2021 10:02:48 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABVgOS=QDATYk3nn1jLHhVRh7rXoTp1+jQhUE5pZq8P9M0VpUA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi David, Nico,

On 17/04/2021 06:24, David Gow wrote:
> Hi Matt,
> 
>> Like patch 1/6, I can apply it in MPTCP tree and send it later to
>> net-next with other patches.
>> Except if you guys prefer to apply it in KUnit tree and send it to
>> linux-next?
> 
> Given 1/6 is going to net-next, it makes sense to send this out that
> way too, then, IMHO.

Great!
Mat sent this patch to net-next and David already applied it (thanks!):

https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/3fcc8a25e391

> The only slight concern I have is that the m68k test config patch in
> the series will get split from the others, but that should resolve
> itself when they pick up the last patch.

I see. I guess for this MPTCP patch, we are fine because 
MPTCP_KUNIT_TESTS was not used in m68k config.

 > At the very least, this shouldn't cause any conflicts with anything
 > we're doing in the KUnit tree.

Thanks for having checked!

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net