Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rdma tree with the net-next tree

From: Doug Ledford
Date: Wed Mar 16 2016 - 13:35:49 EST

On 3/16/2016 1:18 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
>> is required).
> Side note: can you change this wording for your manual merge script?
> Last merge window (or was it the one before it?) we had confusion with
> people who thought that "no action is required" means "you can just
> ignore this entirely".

I certainly didn't take it that way regardless of the wording. I'm
keenly aware of the short leash you have Mellanox (and by extension
myself) on. I reviewed the merge in detail, enough to satisfy myself
that it was easy, correct, and that the code itself made the merge
obvious (such as the comment that flow table entries need to be last in
the lists in order to support priority transitions, which fairly handily
explained what needed to happen in the merge).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature