linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 2/2] igbvf: remove unused spinlock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e3bc08eb-a292-4b5d-bbb8-cb8787710d52@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 15:57:21 -0700
From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>, Tony Nguyen
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
CC: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, Paul Menzel
	<pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "Eric
 Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 2/2] igbvf: remove unused spinlock



On 9/24/2024 4:21 AM, Wander Lairson Costa wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 3:44 PM Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/23/2024 9:46 AM, Wander Lairson Costa wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 6:04 AM Przemek Kitszel
>>> <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 9/21/24 14:52, Paul Menzel wrote:
>>>>> Dear Wander,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 20.09.24 um 20:59 schrieb Wander Lairson Costa:
>>>>>> tx_queue_lock and stats_lock are declared and initialized, but never
>>>>>> used. Remove them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> It’d be great if you added a Fixes: tag.
>>>>
>>>> Alternatively you could split this series into two, and send this patch
>>>> to iwl-next tree, without the fixes tag. For me this patch is just
>>>> a cleanup, not a fix.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Should I send a new version of the patches separately?
>>
>> The patches apply to the respective trees when split out so I can take
>> these without a re-send. Patch 1 will need a Fixes: for it though...
>>
>> I'm seeing it as: 9d5c824399de ("igb: PCI-Express 82575 Gigabit Ethernet
>> driver")?
>>
> 
> Can you add the tag when you apply the patch or should I add it?
> 

I will add the fixes tag when I said it.

Thanks,
Jake