lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 1/2] net: Fixup netif_attrmask_next_and warning
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:03 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:42:41 -0700 Yury Norov wrote:
> > > Oh, it was reposted today:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221013234349.1165689-2-yury.norov@gmail.com/
> > >
> > > But we need a revert of 854701ba4c as well to cover the issue back up
> > > for 6.1, AFAIU.
> >
> > The patch 854701ba4c is technically correct. I fixed most of warnings in
> > advance, but nobody can foresee everything, right? I expected some noise,
> > and now we have just a few things to fix.
>
> I got 6 warnings booting my machine after pulling back from Linus
> (which included your patches in net for the first time).
> And that's not including the XPS and the virtio warning.
>
> > This is what for -rc releases exist, didn't they?
> >
> > I suggest to keep the patch, because this is the only way to make
> > cpumask_check()-related issues visible to people. If things will go as
> > they go now, I expect that -rc3 will be clean from cpumask_check()
> > warnings.
>
> This sounds too close to saying that "it's okay for -rc1 to be broken".
> Why were your changes not in linux-next for a month before the merge
> window? :(

They spent about a month in -next. Nobody cared.

> We will not be merging a refactoring series into net to silence an
> arguably over-eager warning. We need a minimal fix, Guo Ren's patches
> seem to miss the mark so I reckon the best use of everyone's time is
> to just drop the exposing patch and retry in -next 🤷

If you prefer treating symptoms rather than the disease - I have nothing
to add.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-14 18:17    [W:0.115 / U:0.480 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site