linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net: axienet: Fix deferred probe loop

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: <2025062054-tameness-canal-2204@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 18:01:01 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
Cc: Radhey Shyam Pandey <radhey.shyam.pandey@....com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>,
	Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
	Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net: axienet: Fix deferred probe loop

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 11:41:52AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 6/20/25 01:10, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 04:05:33PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> >> Upon further investigation, the EPROBE_DEFER loop outlined in [1] can
> >> occur even without the PCS subsystem, as described in patch 4/4. The
> >> second patch is a general fix, and could be applied even without the
> >> auxdev conversion.
> >> 
> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250610183459.3395328-1-sean.anderson@linux.dev/
> > 
> > I have no idea what this summary means at all, which isn't a good start
> > to a patch series :(
> > 
> > What problem are you trying to solve?
> 
> See patch 4/4.

That's not what should be in patch 0/4 then, right?

> > What overall solution did you come up with?
> 
> See patch 4/4.

Again, why write a 0/4 summary at all then?

> > Who is supposed to be reviewing any of this?
> 
> Netdev. Hence "PATCH net".
> 
> And see [1] above for background. I will quote it more-extensively next time.

Referring to random links doesn't always work as we deal with thousands
of patches daily, and sometimes don't even have internet access (like
when reviewing patches on long flights/train rides...)

Make things self-contained please.

thanks,

greg k-h