Format question for BlueField 22.04 patches

[Stefan Bader]

On 29.09.22 17:40, David Thompson wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader at canonical.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2022 11:02 AM
>> To: David Thompson <davthompson at nvidia.com>; Dann Frazier <dfrazier at nvidia.com>;
>> kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Subject: Re: Format question for BlueField 22.04 patches
>>
>> On 29.09.22 16:03, David Thompson wrote:
>>> +kernel-team
>>>
>>> Looking for guidance on the format of BlueField 22.04 patches.
>>>
>>> Thanks, Dave
>>>
>>> *From:* David Thompson
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 28, 2022 2:38 PM
>>> *To:* Dann Frazier <dfrazier at nvidia.com>
>>> *Subject:* Format question for BlueField 22.04 patches
>>>
>>> Hi Dann,
>>>
>>> Any 20.04 patches sent to the Canonical kernel team included
>>>
>>> the following string in the Subject line:
>>>
>>> "[SRU][F:linux-bluefield]"
>>>
>>>
>>> For 22.04 patches being sent, should the string instead be
>>>
>>> “[SRU][F:linux-nv-bluefield]” ?
>>
>> For 22.04 it should be "J:" for Jammy and after the colon whatever name we ended up with. As
>> long as the local info is not wrong this would be "linux-bluefield"
>> still/again.
>>
>> So "[SRU][J:linux-bluefield]" for 22.04 patches.
>>
>> -Stefan
>>
>>>
>>> Regards, Dave
>>>
>>>
> 
> Thanks for the reply Stefan.
> 
> And if we have a BlueField patch that applies to Focal and Jammy,
> we can specify "[SRU][F][J][linux-bluefield]" as the prefix, right?

It would work. though "[F/J:linux-bluefield]" would be preferred. It is a bit 
closer to how we usually refer to kernels.

-Stefan
> 
> - Dave
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/attachments/20220930/e0ea61bc/attachment.sig>