XFRM patches are supposed to be sent to maintainers under "NETWORKING
[IPSEC]" heading, but it doesn't cover XFRM docs yet. Add the entry.

Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
---
 MAINTAINERS | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index d652f4f27756ef..4f33daad40bed6 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -18041,6 +18041,7 @@ L:	netdev@vger.kernel.org
 S:	Maintained
 T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec.git
 T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec-next.git
+F:	Documentation/networking/xfrm/
 F:	include/net/xfrm.h
 F:	include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h
 F:	net/ipv4/ah4.c
-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 03:26:14PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> XFRM patches are supposed to be sent to maintainers under "NETWORKING
> [IPSEC]" heading, but it doesn't cover XFRM docs yet. Add the entry.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> ---
>  MAINTAINERS | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index d652f4f27756ef..4f33daad40bed6 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -18041,6 +18041,7 @@ L:	netdev@vger.kernel.org
>  S:	Maintained
>  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec.git
>  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec-next.git
> +F:	Documentation/networking/xfrm/

That means that I'm now responsible for this.
But I'm OK with it if nobody has objections on it.

On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 09:12:35 +0100 Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 03:26:14PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > XFRM patches are supposed to be sent to maintainers under "NETWORKING
> > [IPSEC]" heading, but it doesn't cover XFRM docs yet. Add the entry.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index d652f4f27756ef..4f33daad40bed6 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -18041,6 +18041,7 @@ L:	netdev@vger.kernel.org
> >  S:	Maintained
> >  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec.git
> >  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec-next.git
> > +F:	Documentation/networking/xfrm/  
> 
> That means that I'm now responsible for this.
> But I'm OK with it if nobody has objections on it.

Definitely no objections :) 
Let me mark this series as "Awaiting Upstream".

On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:41:58 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 09:12:35 +0100 Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 03:26:14PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:  
> > > XFRM patches are supposed to be sent to maintainers under "NETWORKING
> > > [IPSEC]" heading, but it doesn't cover XFRM docs yet. Add the entry.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > > index d652f4f27756ef..4f33daad40bed6 100644
> > > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > > @@ -18041,6 +18041,7 @@ L:	netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > >  S:	Maintained
> > >  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec.git
> > >  T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec-next.git
> > > +F:	Documentation/networking/xfrm/    
> > 
> > That means that I'm now responsible for this.
> > But I'm OK with it if nobody has objections on it.  
> 
> Definitely no objections :) 
> Let me mark this series as "Awaiting Upstream".

I take back the "Awaiting Upstream" part. This set conflicts with 
the big ToC tree reorg patch. Let's either merge this into net-next 
or wait for trees to re-sync?

Not a big deal but the conflict is easily avoidable ...

On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 08:44:12AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> I take back the "Awaiting Upstream" part. This set conflicts with 
> the big ToC tree reorg patch. Let's either merge this into net-next 
> or wait for trees to re-sync?

You mean this one [1]? If so, I'm happy for this series to go first then
I can respin the toctree patch.

Thanks.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20251028113923.41932-2-bagasdotme@gmail.com/

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 07:12:25 +0700 Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 08:44:12AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > I take back the "Awaiting Upstream" part. This set conflicts with 
> > the big ToC tree reorg patch. Let's either merge this into net-next 
> > or wait for trees to re-sync?  
> 
> You mean this one [1]? If so, I'm happy for this series to go first then
> I can respin the toctree patch.

Works for me.