From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0F3BC7115C for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 15:46:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=5vxNedAjVSukjlPsPkPSM2hsqyg7r1pIanZ7gFNuJhA=; b=MVyqqHpFZX8zjyw/CLma04sjsi KGO+3ukJQuCN2lZvv8rHnPb3Kxi8uqttUoqfgTJs6F7r6+ThRrC+sFIMm1B+2EC09MKH51hFBWv9K cyivjn2jdpWVwpona+/RMw74JXVmvNh1bnvHcbW2gY3GzVPXmmP9wAe5df0/Q5ukzywJdAT2oq8LC 9oWqUc9/FRfgfuxdy4xB1ITHxE7nRp1PDcn88qdMdYDNoULOSxc3VL28LRa8tGjlNLYVDqSZfB2HB /2NJxno4fxG+xQyFAxiXpcwINoWWUx1UXdp8zv1ug4hlr+1FwIrmV4kY9JLSP8HskrRJPXKbnI+AV IyJHe8tg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uSdwv-0000000G2TB-0Fgv; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 15:46:41 +0000 Received: from out-177.mta1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:203:375::b1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uSdsc-0000000G1D8-3iHr for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 15:42:16 +0000 Message-ID: <56f52836-545a-45aa-8a6b-04aa589c2583@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1750434131; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=5vxNedAjVSukjlPsPkPSM2hsqyg7r1pIanZ7gFNuJhA=; b=I8GAJEjtP32F6Q/LrmgaBIS5PQsFSM5HwZwx0rWj3XnRmwTe/El0Ii75HYP9sLU6d/ZOJ1 cVI/VZ6Wu44tRXNFU6169t1XuPyIfdInIkwtFErnMxZeu+yhZmUbYey44qlIToRwds80dF 1U8WRtNlQekNfmts8HlBdehctnL7cJ0= Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:41:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net: axienet: Fix deferred probe loop To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Radhey Shyam Pandey , Andrew Lunn , "David S . Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Michal Simek , Saravana Kannan , Leon Romanovsky , Dave Ertman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ira Weiny , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Danilo Krummrich , "Rafael J. Wysocki" References: <20250619200537.260017-1-sean.anderson@linux.dev> <2025062004-sandblast-overjoyed-6fe9@gregkh> Content-Language: en-US X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Sean Anderson In-Reply-To: <2025062004-sandblast-overjoyed-6fe9@gregkh> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250620_084215_144792_5C04E1DF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 10.44 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 6/20/25 01:10, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 04:05:33PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: >> Upon further investigation, the EPROBE_DEFER loop outlined in [1] can >> occur even without the PCS subsystem, as described in patch 4/4. The >> second patch is a general fix, and could be applied even without the >> auxdev conversion. >> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250610183459.3395328-1-sean.anderson@linux.dev/ > > I have no idea what this summary means at all, which isn't a good start > to a patch series :( > > What problem are you trying to solve? See patch 4/4. > What overall solution did you come up with? See patch 4/4. > Who is supposed to be reviewing any of this? Netdev. Hence "PATCH net". And see [1] above for background. I will quote it more-extensively next time. --Sean