From: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 15:43:02 +0300
> I see the following two alternatives for applying these
> 1. Linger patch 2 in net-next to avoid surprises in the upcoming
> release. In this case patch 3 can be reworked not to depend on
> the new rt6_nexthop() definition in patch 2. I guess this is a
> better option, so that patch 2 can be reviewed and tested for
> longer time.
> 2. Include all 3 patches in net tree - more risky because this
> is my first attempt to change IPv6.
I have decided to merge all three patches into -net right now.
I've reviewed these patches several times and they look good
I'll let them cook upstream for at least a week before submitting them
to -stable to let any last minute errors show themselves and
subsequently get resolved.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html