From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792578838; b=L5+OTokdRPxBer4Ft1Q2onIAZp3bblBGGZTDo2o2WWdILdDxRvjg0lbKvVfWDkxweGfl G+Q5TBE9DoGW+U0ZAfrc4DEYwAi66uOKuqrzLMCX4+IhOBjMWTvzF4PziBWNlYJIrJf4m T76zfnL7+/bvrGZaY+oe2Y8IiBHUqlPsE/hjcg0HtK+cK5AQ1jElG4cO8N5JAWydvLrT1 0nPgyTJU5SUW0bdJGuulFB9qpWemtW2zx5CzCakRZBdOqKnwi1AqWIYIAZ+sp3w2P5ASS riIgqZzDQg6soazSKCptU0BacciWBrfh/vmPqvRbvhvM6U5xJ/4/FZHiulkqX2BFEzg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792578838; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:Auto-Submitted:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; b=VLCjGAsbLjZCaIJo9je+NLiQHN8b6glnq3nJHIIuFZss864wK5MHTOxEJSctaWPKr0aW p0Xz7B6A6hv2RxrhTHcAPt0kmPtQFsDlPFreInXvBvYrzC2IdbEYQOqveY5LS90puWAyW vSJ2NPTCRQHwMXKFfTr42DYAgnMgPFCYWO+HxYixjUzWLXXR/5TBsexLrm/Z59mLQz04w noppjhfh7yRd6+CXOs1c27dxXbCafLDSRJECeyIsRbfB96Kvil2YEYSplbxXKRsjP0PRb jDHSilAw0qllP3b11OUM3mBJn3oeG/g+EG/YZ4cku23ALZRATy85kZXLn3XO0D4i7lA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b="Gr4Ub/lQ"; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED2A8606A319; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:33:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=Gr4Ub/lQ Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F1241F000C9; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:33:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792578837; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=Gr4Ub/lQVuhKjS/xXFXOIwIkPTzZ9wD8D2EfIP+NdoMjG7dbYzC9eop+wZTpPBtfO ybXCx/EniZONzodXzWJKc1MCbXahorjO4DQFOaSF9CGbP7DHUaasgCUHXzUXH92Ua+ zelBCZULMgmJ8DDUUmffe34sCuse671p9/JIAOiJvCxMbbLdfrbd0g7g7/I2b6Tp+m uDBzrsEFtsH/pjcC+frqv/df9Yd4xqhQA7hzcXsbZvyDWzHeR+xO00WHL+LwBHGKpg IVtouVjDd7Hu8XKLbPUAAHx47tClCymfXmkrQnO+D9DHsuObgfwXnI8QbuWPKh6NPF WXmCcklAGXQDQ== From: netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org To: Marc Kleine-Budde Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de, Vincent Mailhol , stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/11] can: dev: can_dropped_invalid_skb: drop CAN XL frames on non-CAN XL devices Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:33:56 +0000 Message-ID: <179257883662.3290.13718519694562894239@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20261021102756.1900679-2-mkl@pengutronix.de> References: <20261021102756.1900679-1-mkl@pengutronix.de> <20261021102756.1900679-2-mkl@pengutronix.de> Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: linux-can@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Hi! This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its commit messages seem to be missing some information: - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static analysis tool scan. - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages. Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead, reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages then. The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think that is the case please reply and explain.