[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220601065209.GY2168@kadam>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 09:52:09 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH (mellanox tree)] net/mlx5: delete dead code in
mlx5_esw_unlock()
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 01:11:25PM -0700, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On 30 May 14:40, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>
> You can use [PATCH net-mlx5] for fixes and [PATCH net-next-mlx5] for
> none-critical commits.
>
Realistically, there is no way I'm going to remember that and there
isn't an automated way to look it up.
I try really hard to get the net tree stuff correct so when netdev is
on the CC list. But putting the correct net tree in the subject line
is quite a huge headache and I quite often get it wrong.
> > Smatch complains about this function:
> >
> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eswitch.c:2000 mlx5_esw_unlock()
> > warn: inconsistent returns '&esw->mode_lock'.
> >
> > Before commit ec2fa47d7b98 ("net/mlx5: Lag, use lag lock") there
> > used to be a matching mlx5_esw_lock() function and the lock and
> > unlock functions were symmetric. But now we take the long
> ^ lock ?
Heh. Thanks.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists