Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mptcp: fix conflict with <netinet/in.h>

From: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 11:16:07 -0700

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 11:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Mat Martineau wrote:
> This is a minor "fix" to be sure, which I thought did not meet the bar for 
> net and therefore submitted for net-next. It's not prep for another 
> change, it's something Ossama and I noticed when doing code review for a 
> userspace program that included the header. There's no problem with kernel 
> compilation, and there's also no issue if the userspace program happens to 
> include netinet/in.h before linux/mptcp.h
> 
> 
> If my threshold for the net branch is too high, I have no objection to 
> having this patch applied there and will recalibrate :)
> 
> Do you prefer to have no Fixes: tags in net-next, or did that just seem 
> ambiguous in this case?

The important point is that the middle ground of marking things as fixes
and at the same time putting them in -next, to still get them
backported but with an extended settling time -- that middle ground
does not exist.

If we look at the patch from the "do we want it backported or not"
perspective I think the answer is yes, hence I'd lean towards net.
If you think it doesn't matter enough for backport - we can drop the
fixes tag and go with net-next. Unfortunately I don't have enough
direct experience to tell how annoying this will be to the user space.
netinet/in.h vs linux/in.h is a mess :(