> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us>
> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 10:47 AM
> 
> Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 04:10:56PM CET, pa...@nvidia.com wrote:
> >
> >> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us>
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 7:26 AM
> >>
> >> Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 06:00:38AM CET, pa...@nvidia.com wrote:
> >> >To easily audit the code, better to keep the device stop() sequence
> >> >to be mirror of the device open() sequence.
> >> >
> >> >Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <pa...@nvidia.com>
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@nvidia.com>
> >>
> >> If this is not fixing bug (which I believe is the case), you should
> >> target it to net- next ([patch net-next] ..).
> >>
> >Yes. Right. First one was fix for net-rc, second was for net-next. And 2nd
> depends on the first to avoid merge conflicts.
> >So, I was unsure how to handle it.
> >Can you please suggest?
> 
> 1) Send the fix to -net
> 2) Wait until -net is merged into -net-next
> 3) Send the second patch to -net-next

Got it. Thanks.

Dave, Jakub,
Please drop this series.
I am sending one by one to net and net-next.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to