From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (server-vie001.gnuweeb.org [89.58.62.56]) (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 C19361D61AA; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 23:57:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=89.58.62.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754438266; cv=none; b=G/iv/TyF4X9oyHcHWq9bV3AHIKvIOxjqi0qhpAIm/msY6RqT85QFWwMOuIfxXfVbHgIhN5xgKaQg031pFqLBMIr2SRoMHXngWMl+IEp+rdUsmEa/MbsKeTvRVSrhQ5yhtxeJyaakgTqXspGI/8SFlkh+vtAa9RPivJYZYubJUik= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754438266; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Azwu2exHhvcNWSkXq+F6f+iwwZa36ojFzn02qKnZGcY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Mlfh1bDm0uHyqVsmEpAgu6nH5SA2QWJtCpTDYDYKDVNEQW10Lodfa0+07qkfBjDlahsnWxUz1nnzUQt2A9timKFMuaaXJuzyTKkRxumxOvmEDY01SUhPo0W296EGcw0eWseyNDVaqwx+CtmgPNOfvbpc5JLk2biI7ov9DYG8oX0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=gnuweeb.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gnuweeb.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gnuweeb.org header.i=@gnuweeb.org header.b=PlEz6jxQ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=89.58.62.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=gnuweeb.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gnuweeb.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gnuweeb.org header.i=@gnuweeb.org header.b="PlEz6jxQ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gnuweeb.org; s=new2025; t=1754438262; bh=Azwu2exHhvcNWSkXq+F6f+iwwZa36ojFzn02qKnZGcY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To: Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:User-Agent:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=PlEz6jxQQL/Nh626X64BFWdHp1WHNm/1f70UudtQaY/+ymVO0RPgDaWwlZp6wTNkT 735uKh9QRgmJwIcLNTdEAm0xTdaLjOGCyO3Bw+x8OQoONqu+ACthmIXYidbjl7K/ec Sdxd+yZTpN8/dtS9n32KnuNYPvw3VykU5AOaYEqs8XoCiunOtANM5nkXVLSLm448fx 5TJr9hMjN2Nboq/H4yFyYUPnxKKttxQoaXwuJBObb2sPf1tdAs+z8xKwa7mXlL1TWG iSgDszzE25T1fnFQnF+rsRawR2tNezN3GfkFEN1Di+QVZEAkrBgYMqfaIwVbzySPIL BWe9ahE5/Dj9Q== Received: from linux.gnuweeb.org (unknown [182.253.126.229]) by server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D8973127C24; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 23:57:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Gw-Bpl: wU/cy49Bu1yAPm0bW2qiliFUIEVf+EkEatAboK6pk2H2LSy2bfWlPAiP3YIeQ5aElNkQEhTV9Q== Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 06:57:36 +0700 From: Ammar Faizi To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Linus Torvalds , Simon Horman , Oliver Neukum , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Netdev Mailing List , Linux USB Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Armando Budianto , gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, John Ernberg Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: usbnet: Fix the wrong netif_carrier_on() call placement Message-ID: References: <20250801190310.58443-1-ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org> <20250804100050.GQ8494@horms.kernel.org> <20250805202848.GC61519@horms.kernel.org> <20250805164747.40e63f6d@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250805164747.40e63f6d@kernel.org> X-Machine-Hash: hUx9VaHkTWcLO7S8CQCslj6OzqBx2hfLChRz45nPESx5VSB/xuJQVOKOB1zSXE3yc9ntP27bV1M1 On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 04:47:47PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Wed, 6 Aug 2025 01:40:37 +0300 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > So my gut feel is that the > > > > if (test_and_clear_bit(EVENT_LINK_CARRIER_ON, &dev->flags)) > > netif_carrier_on(dev->net); > > > > should actually be done outside that if-statement entirely, because it > > literally ends up changing the thing that if-statement is testing. > > Right. I think it should be before the if (!netif_carrier_ok(dev->net)) > > Ammar, could you retest and repost that, since we haven't heard from > John? OK, I'll send a v3 shortly. -- Ammar Faizi