netdev - Re: [PATCH v4] aquantia: Remove the build

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]

Date:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 08:42:43 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     "Ramsay, Lincoln" <Lincoln.Ramsay@...i.com>
Cc:     Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        Igor Russkikh <irusskikh@...vell.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Bogdanov <dbogdanov@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] aquantia: Remove the build_skb path

On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:36:22 +0000 Ramsay, Lincoln wrote:
> > (Next time please include in the subject the tree that you're targetting
> > the patch)  
> 
> I guess you mean like [PATCH master v5] ? Should I be targeting
> something other than the master branch on the main git repo?
> (https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git)

In this case the patch will be merged into the networking tree, and
then travel downstream to Linus. So you want to target this tree:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/

IOW [PATCH net v5].

> > please add a From: line at the beginning of the mail which matches
> > the signoff (or use git-send-email, it'll get it right).  
> 
> Sure.
> 
> > Ah, one more thing, this is the correct fixes tag, right?
> > Fixes: 018423e90bee ("net: ethernet: aquantia: Add ring support code")
> > Please add it right before the signoff line.  
> 
> I didn't quite understand this header... but yeah, I guess that's the
> commit that adds the fast path I am removing.

Yup, it points to the oldest revision of the code where the bug is
present. In your case oldest revision where:

    When performing IPv6 forwarding, there is an expectation that SKBs
    will have some headroom. When forwarding a packet from the aquantia
    driver, this does not always happen, triggering a kernel warning.

> > > Align continuations of the lines under '(' like:  
> > 
> > I am only changing the leading indent. Am I still expected to satisfy the patch checker?
> > 
> > The current patch is very clear about what is happening if you do a diff -w but if I start
> > changing other things to satisfy the checker, that goes away.  
> 
> Some of the patch checker complaints are only leading whitespace
> (obviously not a problem for diff -w), but 2 of them involve actual
> changes (changing , to ; and moving the first argument from the line
> below to the line above).

I don't think it'll make a huge difference for the review-ability of
this change to heed checkpatch's warnings here.