From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27ED784D3C for ; Wed, 8 May 2024 14:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715176837; cv=none; b=V6KrPAWXl5THHArjx9ndXH5vi/qc0ravEK78B0z43e6Zfx1hbrWr62TNJSwdGVOOr32EtWQcbVeVR6Ht6GPqu7Mg+I0dIf6aq4xAc2cEzTqTc0P7bzIHfcnTezqv+BkGwDMhSvuFaegWDSjtTyvCirHSF8mOBRvH8RCeTJuUPCs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715176837; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6IAkZm0nr73a+FCvQU9RrVmjEV4QH7pNc4Sf5PL277k=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc:Subject:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Date:Message-ID; b=PirFULYc8ia9GWNWa8/RSss3Ickp1ERSdOu1SApOD1ljs6UWYYnd+zdvVwKPsCgvpUxRkFFm/Q9MuFULguZ4WWniW/v4V/I/bXzNdXl2i9Br+otE+q4Jem263y65X8Cgi+motSeflszviiBdLxcAlXlmcafg7n92C2FG6h50+WQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=cQCBw2m/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="cQCBw2m/" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1715176835; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Ab+XWd2myJ6L7McJ527uKHYQsSkysWxpTlgV7y7p67A=; b=cQCBw2m/KIgfIdK2QOlSpNrLdemouVyMCd98u1wzcE4Ak8fY1xiYtdDEgJZKOoH4Wc7tEW bIU+7lSBSI09bJQOGphPYFnNj/sH69Tp/C6pb8aV66im9otb/Y0Krlj2USFWE4RS3idLqZ QCg1g1yOCv0ArgGEekKwcI1lTGTt7Mw= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-635-p2fO3rSnO12MqJhgGTVguw-1; Wed, 08 May 2024 10:00:31 -0400 X-MC-Unique: p2fO3rSnO12MqJhgGTVguw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A69C23C025B1; Wed, 8 May 2024 14:00:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.42.28.34]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DF97C0157C; Wed, 8 May 2024 14:00:29 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20240507194447.20bcfb60@kernel.org> References: <20240507194447.20bcfb60@kernel.org> <20240503150749.1001323-1-dhowells@redhat.com> To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Marc Dionne , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/5] rxrpc: Miscellaneous fixes Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1478420.1715176828.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Wed, 08 May 2024 15:00:28 +0100 Message-ID: <1478421.1715176828@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.8 Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Looks like these got marked as Rejected in patchwork. > I think either because lore is confused and attaches an exchange with > DaveM from 2022 to them (?) or because I mentioned to DaveM that I'm > not sure these are fixes. So let me ask - on a scale of 1 to 10, how > convinced are you that these should go to Linus this week rather than > being categorized as general improvements and go during the merge > window (without the Fixes tags)? Ah, sorry. I marked them rejected as I put myself as cc: not S-o-b on one of them, but then got distracted and didn't get around to reposting them. And Jeff mentioned that the use of the MORE-PACKETS flag is not exactly consistent between various implementations. So if you could take just the first two for the moment? Thanks, David