netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: page

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: <ba861ef2-eb28-41c8-b866-f3accc7adf0c@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 15:14:53 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, Alexander Lobakin
	<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, "Ilias
 Apalodimas" <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
	<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Yunsheng Lin
	<linyunsheng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: page_pool: fix warning code

On 7/5/24 14:39, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 14:37 +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
>> Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 14:33:31 +0200
>>
>>> On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 14:32 +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>>> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
>>>> Date: Fri,  5 Jul 2024 13:42:06 +0200
>>>>
>>>>> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> WARN_ON_ONCE("string") doesn't really do what appears to
>>>>> be intended, so fix that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
>>>>
>>>> "Fixes:" tag?
>>>
>>> There keep being discussions around this so I have no idea what's the
>>> guideline-du-jour ... It changes the code but it's not really an issue?
>>
>> Hmm, it's an incorrect usage of WARN_ON() (a string is passed instead of
>> a warning condition),
> 
> Well, yes, but the intent was clearly to unconditionally trigger a
> warning with a message, and the only thing getting lost is the message;
> if you look up the warning in the code you still see it. But anyway, I
> don't care.
> 

for the record, [1] tells: to the -next

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240704072155.2ea340a9@kernel.org/T/#m919e75afc977fd250ec8c4fa37a2fb1e5baadd3f

> The tag would be
> 
> Fixes: 90de47f020db ("page_pool: fragment API support for 32-bit arch with 64-bit DMA")
> 
> if anyone wants it :)
> 
> johannes
>