netdev - Re: [PATCH iwl-next 1/1] ice: Fix persistent failure in ice_get

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAH7f-UKnU7AhcB-JMqMcaw3vpYN7mi=xQXjQUENp1A+QSpVseg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 16:57:45 -0800
From: Cody Haas <chaas@...tgames.com>
To: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
Cc: anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, 
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, 
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next 1/1] ice: Fix persistent failure in ice_get_rxfh

On Fri, Dec 5, 2025 at 2:36 AM Przemek Kitszel
<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com> wrote:
> thank you again for the report, and thank you for the fix, it looks good
> just some little nitpicks from me:

Thank you for the response, I'll get working on the feedback right away.

> 1. this is a bugfix, so you should add a Fixes: tag with the commit that
> added the regression (I remember you have a "slow to rebuild" platform,
> so just let me know how far you have reached with bisection/looking for
> the root cause)

We recently moved the e810 NICs we have onto a server with a much larger CPU so
compilation time is no longer a concern. I believe the regression was
introduced in b66a972.
So I'm currently in the process of bisecting to verify my assumption.
Just running into an
issue with building the 5.12 kernel. I'll be reaching out to the
kernel newbies mailing list for
some advice on handling the compilation issues.

> 2. bugfixes should have [PATCH iwl-net] in the Subject
> 3. you should CC netdev mailing list on IWL submissions too:
>         netdev@...r.kernel.org

Acking these two pieces of feedback, I'll add them.

> nit: you could simply "return 0" here
> then the status variable initialization during declaration could be
> removed
>
> yet another thing: for new code I would name such variable "err"

Acking these two pieces of feedback, I'll update the code accordingly.

Thank you for your time

Cody