[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3f12a532-a0f9-4a7e-bfda-c85b539b81d0@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 18:35:19 +0200
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Mateusz Palczewski
<mateusz.palczewski@...el.com>, Jesse Brandeburg
<jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] i40e: Fix I40E_FLAG_VF_VLAN_PRUNING value
On 19. 10. 23 11:15, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 01:26:20PM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote:
>> Commit c87c938f62d8f1 ("i40e: Add VF VLAN pruning") added new
>> PF flag I40E_FLAG_VF_VLAN_PRUNING but its value collides with
>> existing I40E_FLAG_TOTAL_PORT_SHUTDOWN_ENABLED flag.
>>
>> Move the affected flag at the end of the flags and fix its value.
>>
>> Cc: Mateusz Palczewski <mateusz.palczewski@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> I agree with the correctness of this patch and that it was
> introduced by the cited commit.
>
> However, I do wonder if, as a fix for 'net':
>
> 1) The patch description could include some discussion of
> what problem is resolved, and, ideally, how I user might
> get into such a situation.
>
> 2) The following fixes tag is appropriate.
>
> Fixes: c87c938f62d8 ("i40e: Add VF VLAN pruning")
>
Ahh, thanks Simon! I forgot to add Fixes: tag.
Will fix it by v2 and add the reproducer.
Thanks,
Ivan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists