On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 08:24:04AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 11:01:30 -0400 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > git@xxxxxxxxxx:pabeni/linux-devel.git virtio_udp_tunnel_07_07_2025 > > > > > > The first 5 patches in this series, that is, the virtio features > > > extension bits are also available at [2]: > > > > > > git@xxxxxxxxxx:pabeni/linux-devel.git virtio_features_extension_07_07_2025 > > > > > > Ideally the virtio features extension bit should go via the virtio tree > > > and the virtio_net/tun patches via the net-next tree. The latter have > > > a dependency in the first and will cause conflicts if merged via the > > > virtio tree, both when applied and at merge window time - inside Linus > > > tree. > > > > > > To avoid such conflicts and duplicate commits I think the net-next > > > could pull from [1], while the virtio tree could pull from [2]. > > > > Or I could just merge all of this in my tree, if that's ok > > with others? > > No strong preference here. My first choice would be a branch based > on v6.16-rc5 so we can all pull in and resolve the conflicts that > already exist. But I haven't looked how bad the conflicts would > be for virtio if we did that. On net-next side they look manageable. OK, let's do it the way Paolo wants then. -- MST
