netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/3] net: stmmac: Fix usage of maximum queue number macros

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: <506cfa39-924e-479b-be2d-b032664958a9@socionext.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 11:41:20 +0900
From: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
 Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/3] net: stmmac: Fix usage of maximum queue number
 macros

Hi Russell,

On 2025/01/27 18:51, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 06:24:47PM +0900, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
>> The maximum number of Rx and Tx queues is defined by MTL_MAX_RX_QUEUES
> and
>> MTL_MAX_TX_QUEUES respectively.
>>
>> There are some places where Rx and Tx are used in reverse. Currently
> these
>> two values as the same and there is no impact, but need to fix the usage
>> to keep consistency.
> 
> I disagree that this should be targetting the net tree - I think it
> should be the net-next tree. Nothing is currently broken, this isn't
> fixing a regression, there is no urgent need to get it into mainline.
> It is merely a cleanup because both macros have the same value:
> 
> include/linux/stmmac.h:#define MTL_MAX_RX_QUEUES        8
> include/linux/stmmac.h:#define MTL_MAX_TX_QUEUES        8

I was a bit confused about how to choose net and net-next in this case,
but I understand what you are saying.

As I wrote:
>> Currently these two values as the same and there is no impact

this case isn't about fixing what is broken and also not required fixes
for the stable kernel, so I should post this series to net-next without
Fixes: tag.

> Please re-send for net-next after the merge window and net-next has
> re-opened.

I see. I'll take care and repost.

Thank you,

---
Best Regards
Kunihiko Hayashi