linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 7/9] net/mlx5e: Properly access RCU protected qdisc

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: <badcacf1-c42e-4cd4-8d3a-a9a5b3407439@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 17:47:26 +0300
From: Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, saeedm@...dia.com, gal@...dia.com,
 leonro@...dia.com, tariqt@...dia.com, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 7/9] net/mlx5e: Properly access RCU protected
 qdisc_sleeping variable

On 12/06/2025 17:22, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 10:31:45 +0300 Mark Bloch wrote:
>>> I don't think this is a functional change? We don't treat silencing
>>> compiler warnings as fixes, not for sparse or W=1 warnings.  
>>
>> Well Eric's commit: d636fc5dd692c8f4e00ae6e0359c0eceeb5d9bdb
>> that added this annotation was because of a syzbot report.
> 
> And your point is?

I just mean there's a reason for using annotations, and being
the odd one out feels off. I also wouldn't want anyone to
accidentally reference that logic (if they add HTB offloads support).

Will push via net-next.

Mark