linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 1/5] net: netdevsim: fix inconsistent carrier state after link/unlink

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: <aVP72wedMbegkqzs@desktop.homenetwork>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2025 01:20:43 +0900
From: Yohei Kojima <yk@...oj.net>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/5] net: netdevsim: fix inconsistent carrier state
 after link/unlink

On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 12:02:22PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Thank you for the quick reply. I don't intend for this patch to be
> > backported to the stable tree. My understanding was that bugfix patches
> > to the net tree should have Fixes: tag for historical tracking.
> > 
> > > 
> > > netdevsim is not a real device. Do its bugs actually bother people?
> > 
> > This patch fixes a real bug that is seen when a developer tries to test
> > TFO or netdevsim tests on NetworkManager-enabled systems: it causes
> > false positives in kselftests on such systems.
> 
> O.K, then keep the Fixes tag and submit it for net. However, the tests
> should be considered development work, and submitted to net-next, if
> they are not fixes. Please split this into two series.

Sure, I've submitted the v2 patch here.

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/cover.1767108538.git.yk@y-koj.net/

Following your suggestion, I've removed the unrelated TFO tests and
the netdevsim test improvement. I will post the removed patches as a
separate series once net-next reopens.

However, I kept the regression test for this patch in the v2 series, as
the "1.5.10. Co-posting selftests" section in the maintainer-netdev
document says:

  Selftests should be part of the same series as the code changes.
  Specifically for fixes both code change and related test should
  go into the same tree (the tests may lack a Fixes tag, which is
  expected). Mixing code changes and test changes in a single commit
  is discouraged.

> 
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html
> 
>     Andrew

Thank you,
Yohei Kojima

> 
> ---
> pw-bot: cr