lvs-devel
|
To: | Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [PATCH ipvs 2/2] net: ipvs: sctp: do not recalc sctp checksum when not needed |
Cc: | Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@xxxxxxxxxx>, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sctp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
From: | Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:38:21 +0900 |
[ Cc: Pablo ] On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:00:37AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote: > > Hello, > > On Mon, 28 Oct 2013, Simon Horman wrote: > > > Thanks, I have pushed it to ipvs-next. > > > > I will hold off on sending a pull-request to Pablo until you send > > the 2nd patch. > > First patch is a bugfix, it should go to stable > kernels. The second patch looks like an optimization. Good point. Pablo, what is the best way to handle this? Should I send the fix as a pull-request for nf or nf-next? -- 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 |
Previous by Date: | [PATCH v2 ipvs-next] net: ipvs: sctp: do not recalc sctp csum when ports didn't change, Daniel Borkmann |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH v2 ipvs-next] net: ipvs: sctp: do not recalc sctp csum when ports didn't change, Julian Anastasov |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH ipvs 2/2] net: ipvs: sctp: do not recalc sctp checksum when not needed, Julian Anastasov |
Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH ipvs 2/2] net: ipvs: sctp: do not recalc sctp checksum when not needed, Julian Anastasov |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |