On 7/18/25 11:29 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Paolo I'm likely confused. That series is in net-next, right? > So now it would be work to drop it from there, and invalidate > all the testing it got there, for little benefit - > the merge conflict is easy to resolve. Yes, that series is in net-next now. My understanding of the merge plan was to pull such series in _both_ the net-next and the vhost tree. Pulling from a stable public branch allows constant commit hashes in both trees, avoids conflicts with later vhost patches in the vhost tree and with later virtio_net/tun/tap patches in net-next and also avoid conflicts at merge window time. We do (in net-next) that sort of hashes sharing from time to time for cross-subtrees changes, like this one. But not a big deal if you didn't/don't pull the thing in the vhost tree. At this point, merging it will be likely quite complex and there will be likely no gains on vhost tree management side. Perhaps we could use this schema next time. Thanks, Paolo
