From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5B3E39CCFF for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 09:32:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791797536; cv=none; b=rgCbOQbdU0dVGPMbrPhKjIbq0IpQDq73aktIiSVV0CmJbgaPxtDrw+qtJp0w/GXHYyhSm1c8RQeqALfWbdFb6YIH8ZXoM2UVbx7cSXA5AszxG9xjEUDvlzOBp/flH9BbNeq/6JrntqEBKmJYQFs0/YIu0eedBJbLLGNOAxXPEHQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791797536; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KYqI9HkXUwo3MXQthb8p9CSTwyDg+dp9wkTPlS2vQsk=; h=Message-ID:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date; b=ZYIBFBomWY8KxkK5hDAQYvnGrd0u6nWgsjGSRZjzOFCSafsGKXazYn/eVkhTqnfz6rrTgpKCB2P5CyCQL3/Z0FjppVYg6oozNPraK1OqZ+2VYomIJpKXst4AdlOUmIRp5QKNRZhftYR+cEq/1ERr2raj6XcfZL2yClg5VMRs0NI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hM0OBDCP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hM0OBDCP" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 253A01F0089B; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 09:32:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1791797534; bh=tKkVoZ7c0xCcMGgYnhfgI6H1z+MwclkoKylD0quA7CA=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=hM0OBDCP4/mo60DLCU2pcZQrrgyOdSneoh5RZF0Or/VsA0l3Mqt9+Rv+QKxCkUCtv +f6bPwGLpXwnhV5sb7ADDy00FWPdwzXxz9ixr+OA5yOiqB8GXsmiU9w3dRPiXz1lJo Y1nfP+etILAeltyMK5QNeh1CqxY7qkRLhxQafU32JeIaJ863WJsRDDBwS8DUW0JMIh flcr7m+0FFj9o3mVzY6ql7qj0Jh4cWPa11Ds75rkNUAlIMR5Ey+09yuVb2an7rqNrP WmYObKtPhpvkfqrc3AVAURg4r3cya30mZxifXJTasYpPJBtD5QL2tjzcl3BlGxtBDL TIXQG1O3iF1cw== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/mlx5e: Rename state_destroy to rx_mode_active in flow steering Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Tariq Toukan" Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261011093100.769149-1-tariqt@nvidia.com> References: <20261011093100.769149-1-tariqt@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 09:32:13 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] net/mlx5e: spurious WARN_ON_ONCE in mlx5e_del_vlan_rules() on error= paths -- commit cc0cc005a261a4ae9c4dc0882c52ded86fc801c3 Author: Alexei Lazar net/mlx5e: Rename state_destroy to rx_mode_active in flow steering This commit renames the state_destroy flag to rx_mode_active to better clarify its purpose in the flow steering code. It controls the enablement of RX mode handling and acts as a safeguard during device teardown. > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_fs.c b/drivers/ne= t/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_fs.c > index 12492c4a5d410..c19238bc821fb 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_fs.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_fs.c [ ... ] > @@ -560,7 +560,7 @@ static void mlx5e_del_vlan_rules(struct mlx5e_flow_st= eering *fs) > for_each_set_bit(i, fs->vlan->active_svlans, VLAN_N_VID) > mlx5e_fs_del_vlan_rule(fs, MLX5E_VLAN_RULE_TYPE_MATCH_STAG_VID, i); > =20 > - WARN_ON_ONCE(fs->state_destroy); > + WARN_ON_ONCE(fs->rx_mode_active); [Severity: Low] Does this trigger a spurious warning on error paths? If mlx5e_attach_netdev() begins execution, it sets rx_mode_active to true. If a subsequent function like profile->init_rx() fails (for example, if mlx5e_ptp_alloc_rx_fs() fails), the error rollback path calls mlx5e_destroy_vlan_table() which calls mlx5e_del_vlan_rules(). Since rx_mode_active is still true, the WARN_ON_ONCE() is hit during the rollback. [ ... ] > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c b/drivers/= net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c > index f90b5a34e0972..478b5956044bd 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c > @@ -6557,8 +6557,9 @@ int mlx5e_attach_netdev(struct mlx5e_priv *priv) > =20 > clear_bit(MLX5E_STATE_DESTROYING, &priv->state); > if (priv->fs) > - mlx5e_fs_set_state_destroy(priv->fs, > - !test_bit(MLX5E_STATE_DESTROYING, &priv->state)); > + mlx5e_fs_set_rx_mode_active(priv->fs, > + !test_bit(MLX5E_STATE_DESTROYING, > + &priv->state)); [Severity: Low] Because rx_mode_active is set to true early in device attachment here before calling init_rx(), could it remain true when handling a failure and lead to the spurious warning mentioned above? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261011093100.7691= 49-1-tariqt@nvidia.com?part=3D1