netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] mlx4/mlx5: {mlx4,mlx5e}_en_get_module

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: <7e43fc1e-568b-4572-99b1-703773c0c431@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 11:38:30 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Krzysztof Olędzki <ole@....pl>
CC: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, "Simon
 Horman" <horms@...nel.org>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, "David S.
 Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, "Paolo
 Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, "Leon
 Romanovsky" <leon@...nel.org>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] mlx4/mlx5: {mlx4,mlx5e}_en_get_module_info
 cleanup

On 9/15/24 04:21, Krzysztof Olędzki wrote:
> On 14.09.2024 at 01:21, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 07:48:08PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 19:12:01 -0700 Krzysztof Olędzki wrote:
>>>> On 13.09.2024 at 13:55, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 23:38:45 -0700 Krzysztof Olędzki wrote:
>>>>>> Use SFF8024 constants defined in linux/sfp.h instead of private ones.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Make mlx4_en_get_module_info() and mlx5e_get_module_info() to look
>>>>>> as close as possible to each other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Simplify the logic for selecting SFF_8436 vs SFF_8636.
>>>>>
>>>>> Minor process suggestion, I think you may be sending the patches one by
>>>>> one. It's best to format them into a new directory and send all at once
>>>>> with git send-email. Add a cover letter, too.
>>>>>    
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, yes, will do for v2. I assume this needs to wait for about
>>>> two weeks for net-next to re-open?
>>>
>>> The cleanups - yes, but if patch 3 works you should make it independent
>>> and send as a fix (and trees never close for fixes).
>>
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>
>> Just to expand on what Jakub wrote a little. In general fixes should have a
>> Fixes tag and be targeted at the net tree.
>>
>> 	Subject: [PATCH net] ...
>>
>> Link: https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html
> 
> Yes, thank you Simon for the additional feedback.
> 
> I initially targeted net-next following Ido's request:
>   https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/Ztna8O1ZGUc4kvKJ@shredder.mtl.com/
> 
> If we all believe "net" is the right target, I'm more than happy to update it and re-send that single
> patch now. Should I mark it as "v2" even if no difference because of the tree change?

yes, additionally please provide a changelog, which will say "retarget
to -net" and it's most welcomed if you also provide links to past
discussions

> 
> Also, I did include Fixes in that patch:
>   Fixes: f5826c8c9d57 ("net/mlx4_en: Fix wrong return value on ioctl EEPROM query failure")
>   Fixes: 32a173c7f9e9 ("net/mlx4_core: Introduce mlx4_get_module_info for cable module info reading")

those two fixes tags are correct picks for your two changes, but I think
that it could be combined into one place, I will reply in the current
"patch 3" thread (now you see why it's beneficial to send whole series
together :))

> 
> See: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/2aa0787e-a148-456e-b1b5-8f1e9785ed04@ans.pl/
> 
> Thanks,
>   Krzysztof
>