On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 11:55:08AM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I wonder, by the way, if 1/3 and 2/3 shouldn't be applied meanwhile > > (perhaps that was the reason for moving this at the end...?). > > Yes, that was one of the reasons. > > Pablo, I will resend this patch later, targeting nf-next. > I will not resend patches 1 and 2. OK; then patch 1 and 2 for nf.git and 3 for nf-next.git. > > Otherwise it's a bit difficult (for me at least) to understand how this > > macro should be used (without following the whole path). Alternatively, > > a comment could also fix that I guess. > > I prefer better variable name to comments. > > > Everything else looks good to me, thanks for all the improvements! > > Thanks for reviewing. I will wait for patches 1 and 2 > to make it to nf, then for nf->nf-next resync and will > then resend this with all of your change requests included. OK.
