Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1622547
| From | R Parameswaran <parameswaran.r7@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] L2TP device MTU setup - tunnel socket needs a lock |
| Date | 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvxnb-Zv-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tvgZ3-7E0-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tvlm2-1MB-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi Guillaume, Please see inline: On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 08:14:37PM -0700, R. Parameswaran wrote: >> >> The MTU overhead calculation in L2TP device set-up >> merged via commit b784e7ebfce8cfb16c6f95e14e8532d0768ab7ff >> needs to be adjusted to lock the tunnel socket while >> referencing the sub-data structures to derive the >> socket's IP overhead. > > Thanks. > > Tested-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr> > > BTW, you don't need to add "v1" for the first version of a patch. > There's also no need for numbering pathes when there's only one in the > series. And we normally prefix the commit message with "<subsystem>: ". > For this patch, your subject would look like " [PATCH net-next] l2tp: ...". > > Also, you could have added a "Reported-by:" tag (I don't really mind > in this case, but that's good practice). Thanks for correcting these (and for testing the changes) and sorry for the Reported-by omission. I'll respin by tonight with these, per reply to Dave. regards, Ramkumar
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH net-next v1 1/1] L2TP device MTU setup - tunnel socket needs a lock "R. Parameswaran" <parameswaran.r7@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 05:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] L2TP device MTU setup - tunnel socket needs a lock Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr> - 2017-04-12 10:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] L2TP device MTU setup - tunnel socket needs a lock R Parameswaran <parameswaran.r7@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] L2TP device MTU setup - tunnel socket needs a lock David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2017-04-12 16:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] L2TP device MTU setup - tunnel socket needs a lock R Parameswaran <parameswaran.r7@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 22:40 +0200
csiph-web