From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2749764339558317818==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Matthieu Baerts To: mptcp at lists.01.org Subject: [MPTCP] Re: [MPTCP][PATCH v3 mptcp-next 0/5] move to next addr when timeout Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 08:58:50 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: CA+WQbwsMGQaDeAGc6DQBQvQecDHBQ8Dr6xaSsG1kfrfniOxpig@mail.gmail.com X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 7962 --===============2749764339558317818== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Geliang, On 26/02/2021 04:42, Geliang Tang wrote: > Matthieu Baerts =E4=BA=8E2021=E5=B9=B42= =E6=9C=8825=E6=97=A5=E5=91=A8=E5=9B=9B =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=8811:01=E5=86=99=E9= =81=93=EF=BC=9A >> Tests + export have been queued! > = > I'm sorry to bring you extra work and trouble. But my patches on the > export/20210225T204843 branch still need to be adjusted the order. > = > This series "move to next addr when timeout" should be put after the > series "move to next addr and testcases" like this: I can sure change the order but do we need to change it because some = patches depends on others that are set after? I should certainly explain why it is in this order: - Initially I put the "rm list" series - Then I added "mptcp: free resources when the port number is = mismatched" and "mptcp: drop unused subflow in = mptcp_pm_subflow_established" because they were looking like fixes for = net-next - Then I had to put "move to next addr when timeout" series before "rm = list" because some patches had to be inserted before "mptcp: drop unused = subflow in mptcp_pm_subflow_established" But I can understand if the dependences are not OK. If it is, that's not = an issue to change the order. If not, I guess we can leave it like that. = We will end up sending everything at the next merge window anyway. Cheers, Matt -- = Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions www.tessares.net --===============2749764339558317818==--