From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3677C76195 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 11:38:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231470AbjCWLiM (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 07:38:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59194 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229518AbjCWLiJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 07:38:09 -0400 Received: from mx.sberdevices.ru (mx.sberdevices.ru [45.89.227.171]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32D77193F0; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 04:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s-lin-edge02.sberdevices.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.sberdevices.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277F75FD0A; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:38:02 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sberdevices.ru; s=mail; t=1679571482; bh=7lZi752yaidVYn1I7MsqCySIdC2Vy7xBMR/W3J+6ogU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; b=c8GcqIsVoN/ou8o+y4TgdM7++0urDlRBiw8kOscr5GSl8eIYcuk5nFyEA9a4uChQ2 FV6LBxYoJp0c4J0hBBJgOzc+/rbMpNV+3rrSleFjPtE5BEt6mdctkRspkHXqSPlDqZ 0G7gEOqGr/RagIdwUCaKkrforW/YpRAQtE7l+EYmy9y2la1h1SJBzLjn5QoZ41LoAl 75VNB+glS1T8kknmxsEJ3uqNb4lgnERFwBH2GjXt25lltEGSm1v63T2JxU9cBWZNPN kPUpn0RQTMjfFb/xSTKLvXiTycNGO6kTgmMeQ3r9W1JWh6WPfQcZDVAzafYjGr6mCv n2xbMCeU/374w== Received: from S-MS-EXCH01.sberdevices.ru (S-MS-EXCH01.sberdevices.ru [172.16.1.4]) by mx.sberdevices.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:37:56 +0300 (MSK) Message-ID: <11b36ca2-4f0a-5fe4-bd84-d93eb0fa34c5@sberdevices.ru> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:34:44 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.1 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/2] allocate multiple skbuffs on tx Content-Language: en-US To: Stefano Garzarella CC: Stefan Hajnoczi , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Bobby Eshleman , , , , , , References: <2e06387d-036b-dde2-5ddc-734c65a2f50d@sberdevices.ru> <20230323104800.odrkkiuxi3o2l37q@sgarzare-redhat> <15e9ac56-bedc-b444-6d9a-8a1355e32eaf@sberdevices.ru> <20230323111110.gb4vlaqaf7icymv3@sgarzare-redhat> From: Arseniy Krasnov In-Reply-To: <20230323111110.gb4vlaqaf7icymv3@sgarzare-redhat> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.16.1.6] X-ClientProxiedBy: S-MS-EXCH01.sberdevices.ru (172.16.1.4) To S-MS-EXCH01.sberdevices.ru (172.16.1.4) X-KSMG-Rule-ID: 4 X-KSMG-Message-Action: clean X-KSMG-AntiSpam-Status: not scanned, disabled by settings X-KSMG-AntiSpam-Interceptor-Info: not scanned X-KSMG-AntiPhishing: not scanned, disabled by settings X-KSMG-AntiVirus: Kaspersky Secure Mail Gateway, version 1.1.2.30, bases: 2023/03/23 09:00:00 #20997914 X-KSMG-AntiVirus-Status: Clean, skipped Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 23.03.2023 14:11, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:53:40PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >> >> >> On 23.03.2023 13:48, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:01:40PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>>> Hello Stefano, >>>> >>>> thanks for review! >>> >>> You're welcome! >>> >>>> >>>> Since both patches are R-b, i can wait for a few days, then send this >>>> as 'net-next'? >>> >>> Yep, maybe even this series could have been directly without RFC ;-) >> >> "directly", You mean 'net' tag? Of just without RFC, like [PATCH v5]. In this case >> it will be merged to 'net' right? > > Sorry for the confusion. I meant without RFC but with net-next. > > Being enhancements and not fixes this is definitely net-next material, > so even in RFCs you can already use the net-next tag, so the reviewer > knows which branch to apply them to. (It's not super important since > being RFCs it's expected that it's not complete, but it's definitely an > help for the reviewer). > > Speaking of the RFC, we usually use it for patches that we don't think > are ready to be merged. But when they reach a good state (like this > series for example), we can start publishing them already without the > RFC tag. > > Anyway, if you are not sure, use RFC and then when a maintainer has > reviewed them all, surely you can remove the RFC tag. > > Hope this helps, at least that's what I usually do, so don't take that > as a strict rule ;-) Ah ok, I see now, thanks for details Thanks, Arseniy > > Thanks, > Stefano >