From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-177.mta1.migadu.com (out-177.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.177]) (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 74C9F253F16 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 16:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.177 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750437307; cv=none; b=RXKFjkCuihfky5nheWewJ8jYb6X+OIkO9sp8GLU83kKXXEev6hdD6SIwYX1uKcxpQAT41SOzpUyKpYl7dATt+pt3M1eHCVrhrHqBBPpuKiv/joO+f3Wlhj6qGwd5blvRtsFdVdKOhCy56Z9XhfAMDByUfmgptSGxOoSnF589BK0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750437307; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oaTRh4ds681QZcVYWaTXlb4ef8A2ijup6tRtesQ4SOM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=YfEC9lM4Nu00pJAduJfRg/57pmRrGK7mMp0jpgvDEXNIF/qaaMnot/26UcaBIH3iNg1OlQWKJUXu5o/qsyyuwjG8WnlkxVRUmNK89MLxDJsE/oIHPutoggKICzykIPTlgMEJoBuy61PCWY5MwGBIFQP7TSB56h+eo5EqI/oNhkc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=Q3rbwmNe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.177 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="Q3rbwmNe" Message-ID: <3ff0f1eb-fd69-4452-9e24-738f47b0203e@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1750437301; 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=2Pt53J5CQyhMhBy2UHYMO8n7eZQLEZ2R9chwdbp1yGI=; b=Q3rbwmNeb2YVBcJopM73p3v4MtiDUNCI9mWHG/TFSwVNnPebD7QaF4/BgqM6fUTV7RSs9t x+sOduJiZ5MM0tyEsz7TPTu7MzYQCtScim8OhAay/pUoPBcdUtSbz0uCTrxgrMWhOi/f+z 5PFLJIp/YGxBuCohTNfV+cGUbHXzL2Y= Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 12:34:56 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: 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> <56f52836-545a-45aa-8a6b-04aa589c2583@linux.dev> <2025062054-tameness-canal-2204@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: <2025062054-tameness-canal-2204@gregkh> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 6/20/25 12:01, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 11:41:52AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: >> 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. > > That's not what should be in patch 0/4 then, right? > >> > What overall solution did you come up with? >> >> See patch 4/4. > > Again, why write a 0/4 summary at all then? So if I decide in v2 that some patch other than "auxiliary: Allow empty id" has to come first then the series still has the same subject. This makes it easier for maintainers to figure out which v1 the v2 is for. >> > 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. > > Referring to random links doesn't always work as we deal with thousands > of patches daily, and sometimes don't even have internet access (like > when reviewing patches on long flights/train rides...) Well, the link contains the message-id, so you are more than welcome to look it up in your email client. But to spare you the trouble I will quote from it next time in addition to linking. --Sean