linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: cadence: macb: Modernize statistics reporting

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

Message-ID: <20250220101823.20516a77@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:18:23 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
Cc: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org, nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com,
 claudiu.beznea@...on.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, pabeni@...hat.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: cadence: macb: Modernize statistics
 reporting

On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 12:25:09 -0500 Sean Anderson wrote:
> >> I think this should be deferred until v2 of [1] is applied, to make
> >> backporting the fix easier.  
> > 
> > ETOOLATE :) networking trees don't rebase  
> 
> Well, I was expecting a revert and then I would resend this series once
> the linked patch was applied.
> 
> I guess I can send another patch adding locking?

Assuming the fix is applied to net:
Will the trees conflict?
If no - will the code in net still work (just lacking lock protection)?

If there is a conflict you can share a resolution with me and I'll slap
it on as part of the merge.