[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZDVFHe9Hr1csMAgm@corigine.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 13:31:41 +0200
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Denis Plotnikov <den-plotnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com, sony.chacko@...gic.com,
GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com, helgaas@...nel.org,
manishc@...vell.com, shshaikh@...vell.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] qlcnic: check pci_reset_function result
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 01:24:33PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-04-07 at 10:18 +0300, Denis Plotnikov wrote:
> > Static code analyzer complains to unchecked return value.
> > The result of pci_reset_function() is unchecked.
> > Despite, the issue is on the FLR supported code path and in that
> > case reset can be done with pcie_flr(), the patch uses less invasive
> > approach by adding the result check of pci_reset_function().
> >
> > Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
> >
> > Fixes: 7e2cf4feba05 ("qlcnic: change driver hardware interface mechanism")
> > Signed-off-by: Denis Plotnikov <den-plotnikov@...dex-team.ru>
>
> Any special reason to target the net-next tree? This looks like a -net
> candidate to me?
FWIIW, net would be fine by me.
Sorry for not noticing this during earlier review.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists