Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Jul 2018 23:43:26 +0100 | From | Okash Khawaja <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5 0/3] bpf: btf: print bpftool map data with btf |
| |
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 12:35:03AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 07/13/2018 11:35 PM, Okash Khawaja wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:49:01PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > >> On 07/12/2018 05:30 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:08:03 -0700, Okash Khawaja wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> Here are the changes from v4: > >>>> > >>>> patch 2: > >>>> > >>>> - sort headers in btf_dumper.c > >>>> - remove extra parentheses > >>>> - include asm/byteorder.h > >>>> - compile error when big and small endian bitfields macro undefined > >>> > >>> Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> > >> > >> Hmm, strange, by accident I just noticed that only your bpf fix ever made > >> it to patchwork, Okash. > >> > >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_project_netdev_list_-3Fsubmitter-3D74458-26state-3D-2A&d=DwICaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=4wHrS7MHHFLZe_WCJwRVhA&m=wkiBQFYWPyiN9WONHLY0WiZxcOwNRhXaMMLIE551mCA&s=RggQzClRdkwawboGLPgPXHOdUtYffxeOwlcBlFru-P4&e= > >> > >> Potentially because you've sent with attachments which got dropped on > >> the list? > > interesting because i send all patches using quilt mail, the same way i > > sent bpf fix. i can try git-send-email. > > > > also i dropped Acked-by as i changed patch versions. is it common thing > > to do? or should i keep the Acked-by? > > Depends on whether the pieces that have been ACKed changed in the > meantime or not. right, thanks. makes sense :)
regarding patches not showing in patchwork, i've checked that the patches are not attachments. is it going to be a problem with upstreaming if they don't show up in patchwork? should i send patches again?
| |