[PATCH mptcp-next v2 0/2] Squash to "implement mptcp read_sock" v9

Geliang Tang posted 2 patches 2 weeks, 5 days ago
Patches applied successfully (tree, apply log)
git fetch https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next tags/patchew/cover.1756458375.git.tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
net/mptcp/protocol.c                          | 22 ++++++++++++++-----
.../net/mptcp/mptcp_connect_splice.sh         |  3 ++-
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
[PATCH mptcp-next v2 0/2] Squash to "implement mptcp read_sock" v9
Posted by Geliang Tang 2 weeks, 5 days ago
From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>

v2:
 - a new squash-to patch for "mptcp: implement .read_sock".

Based-on: <cover.1752399660.git.tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>

Geliang Tang (2):
  Squash to "mptcp: implement .read_sock"
  Squash to "selftests: mptcp: connect: cover splice mode"

 net/mptcp/protocol.c                          | 22 ++++++++++++++-----
 .../net/mptcp/mptcp_connect_splice.sh         |  3 ++-
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

-- 
2.48.1
Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v2 0/2] Squash to "implement mptcp read_sock" v9
Posted by Matthieu Baerts 2 weeks, 2 days ago
Hi Geliang,

On 29/08/2025 11:10, Geliang Tang wrote:
> From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> 
> v2:
>  - a new squash-to patch for "mptcp: implement .read_sock".

When the series is a few days old, and has not been reviewed yet, I
think it is easier if you send a new version instead of squash-to patches.

I think such squash-to patches are good when patches have already been
applied, or when you realised you forgot something minor just after
having send a series with a few patches. (For the latter, it might be
interesting to use '--in-reply-to $PREVIOUS_COVER_LETTER'.)

When the v10 will be posted, I can check with Paolo if he is planning to
continue the review of this series.

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v2 0/2] Squash to "implement mptcp read_sock" v9
Posted by MPTCP CI 2 weeks, 5 days ago
Hi Geliang,

Thank you for your modifications, that's great!

Our CI did some validations and here is its report:

- KVM Validation: normal: Unstable: 1 failed test(s): packetdrill_add_addr 🔴
- KVM Validation: debug: Unstable: 1 failed test(s): packetdrill_add_addr 🔴
- KVM Validation: btf-normal (only bpftest_all): Success! ✅
- KVM Validation: btf-debug (only bpftest_all): Success! ✅
- Task: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/17320054633

Initiator: Patchew Applier
Commits: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/commits/d89353d190d4
Patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/mptcp/list/?series=996822


If there are some issues, you can reproduce them using the same environment as
the one used by the CI thanks to a docker image, e.g.:

    $ cd [kernel source code]
    $ docker run -v "${PWD}:${PWD}:rw" -w "${PWD}" --privileged --rm -it \
        --pull always mptcp/mptcp-upstream-virtme-docker:latest \
        auto-normal

For more details:

    https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp-upstream-virtme-docker


Please note that despite all the efforts that have been already done to have a
stable tests suite when executed on a public CI like here, it is possible some
reported issues are not due to your modifications. Still, do not hesitate to
help us improve that ;-)

Cheers,
MPTCP GH Action bot
Bot operated by Matthieu Baerts (NGI0 Core)