[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251211142142.18a4a0b2@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 14:21:42 +0900
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@...com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, eperezma@...hat.com,
horms@...nel.org, jasowang@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mst@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, sgarzare@...hat.com, stefanha@...hat.com,
syzbot+ci3edb9412aeb2e703@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
syzbot@...ts.linux.dev, syzbot@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3] net: restore the iterator to its original
state when an error occurs
On Wed, 10 Dec 2025 18:03:14 +0800 Edward Adam Davis wrote:
> > Have you investigated the other callers? Given problems with previous
> > version of this patch I'm worried you have not. If you did please extend
> > the commit message with the appropriate explanation.
> Are you asking if I investigated other zerocopy tests? NO.
I said callers. You're changing behavior of a function, is it going
to break any of the callers.
> The test results [T2] for this version of the patch do not show any
> failures related to zerocopy.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists