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 52B5C352022 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 15:15:40 +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=1789139742; cv=none; b=Y4pHitOxwu5Le5rqurS1eBO9kDQTC5CwInKYeZEVX+kD7aOMA3PXEzGnNSfxyLi27GC135kacWLiywNk91uuiN6TOM1rcwQROxnMNF9u3zWVccg3gVKUi0SD/doEVKuYLVeP6KtAD62mdBENsV0xL4cVjMidJcFcRO8FovKe1/s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789139742; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NRDP0MfR1Q68cCPKPCmZFquU1b+MMuT8gJHnevIbfDo=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=hicNzwr8XZlDT4qP6IIIXb1xHkWWrsaxFMwPDwZQTwtqI5zi2yUJwnrbbZxKUGmafT6sJqmR8QZYxzDOKC9svJJ8XVSCN9vgB5Too2W0XVjxI59/zW8n91reIxpSUwYX5u6iVkr8vIz7chFi/FWgdb19M0uwV02qzUO/KaSowXM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=SWZJQLCH; 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="SWZJQLCH" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B89271F00893; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 15:15:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789139739; bh=59hsyzU+rmq1Nt6YQA/XDUl3dLIgBQnV5WJH8EYxD5A=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=SWZJQLCHVXOwVgx9u/KkGr/sInXylrsK/fOdF8H31nwJ0wIjawxSphSL6Le97TGck 9WtxjBF3FuqqXmduAbYOGgvzq9s8RUsQ7cC2v6u8rnHKzOpF0R+72SUC7n2BiqrFsq iUrQNb9eMU6bNWZWDqwQSAIcz7OM52/70FQVK2d0BIw7k8MTlwY99CWpYtUxNhJ0p4 YZAs5nhpih7tOggTvFNayp6BVJxwBoo7WvmiHVHAPbpzuK4jKnHDGiMeHgADjOfKX9 OXZTI8VHa/egh9nW2QvnHTo0Rs57lXHSnrxhC3ucmSHUN/DBo3wtABDZd5hYs8YUzk u5Qck18jMbBqg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/13 net-next] net: fib: split common nexthop logic to fib_core.c Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Fernando Fernandez Mancera" Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260910144914.8025-10-fmancera@suse.de> References: <20260910144914.8025-1-fmancera@suse.de> <20260910144914.8025-10-fmancera@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 15:15:39 +0000 Message-Id: <20260911151539.B89271F00893@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] Syntax error in `nh_netdev_event` when `CONFIG_IPV4` is enabled, ca= using a build failure. - [Low] Parameter name mismatch in the dummy inline function for `fib_nh_in= it`. -- commit 243925357332d15aa13a077472006e05019dde8d Author: Fernando Fernandez Mancera net: fib: split common nexthop logic to fib_core.c This commit creates fib_core.c and moves functions for common nexthop initialization and release from fib_semantics.c to fib_core.c. This makes shared FIB and nexthop logic accessible to IPv6 when the IPv4 routing stack is omitted. > diff --git a/include/net/ip_fib.h b/include/net/ip_fib.h > index 0a35355fb0f33..4bbafb7b723f2 100644 > --- a/include/net/ip_fib.h > +++ b/include/net/ip_fib.h [ ... ] > @@ -578,10 +584,23 @@ void fib_select_multipath(struct fib_result *res, i= nt hash, > void fib_select_path(struct net *net, struct fib_result *res, > struct flowi4 *fl4, const struct sk_buff *skb); > =20 > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV4) > int fib_nh_init(struct net *net, struct fib_nh *fib_nh, > struct fib_config *cfg, int nh_weight, > struct netlink_ext_ack *extack); > void fib_nh_release(struct net *net, struct fib_nh *fib_nh); > +#else > +static inline int fib_nh_init(struct net *net, struct fib_nh *fib_nh, > + struct fib_config *cfg, int gfp, ^^^ [Severity: Low] Does this code use the correct parameter name here? The actual definition of fib_nh_init in the IPv4 block uses int nh_weight for the fourth parameter. Using gfp in the stub obscures the API contract and might mislead developers into passing a GFP flag instead of a routing weight. > + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) > +{ > + return -EAFNOSUPPORT; > +} [ ... ] > diff --git a/net/ipv4/nexthop.c b/net/ipv4/nexthop.c > index a7c2b8dced4e7..ea747fc2223c4 100644 > --- a/net/ipv4/nexthop.c > +++ b/net/ipv4/nexthop.c [ ... ] > @@ -4004,8 +4005,12 @@ static int nh_netdev_event(struct notifier_block *= this, > nexthop_flush_dev(dev, event); > break; > case NETDEV_CHANGEMTU: > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV4) > + struct netdev_notifier_info_ext *info_ext; > + > info_ext =3D ptr; > nexthop_sync_mtu(dev, info_ext->ext.mtu); > +#endif [Severity: Low] Can this sequence cause a build failure when CONFIG_IPV4 is enabled? In C, a case label cannot be immediately followed by a declaration. This causes a compilation error because a label can only be part of a statement, and a declaration is not a statement. Could we add a block or move the declaration to avoid breaking the build? > rt_cache_flush(dev_net(dev)); > break; > } --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260910144914.8025= -1-fmancera@suse.de?part=3D9