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 C558D136E; Wed, 6 Aug 2025 00:05:37 +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=1754438741; cv=none; b=jaSSSOc2o6hie7yOasOBCK9wdVCwo7OqPKggQEjRt4EeTLIm8aFXzeRXhbb1kqQJzSP1dNZvmKhswDPaQN/akGrwICZb+eP9DHY/F9rvCUkh+TD3/UmVNJ9R1vb4IVRGJXye0FYkd14IXEMWXiRi2J6ieDoT+6iDXTNCXKSjOCg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754438741; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bj+RZzaHVNpoliwAGa9XYm5UNfnwharwglOw4U7Tgek=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=KuKH9lZ8XL1+Vl7cT25KeXbatugXLAbNE3wp0T9g+ChhS0gEFL/KVWspRRrQJVal63LBQGomavPjPjp57D9kN3IXTW1PaEFzp5a29phvw+xpISNKrva5cN2BADPulDE5Q0CMyF7kAEqXlKkQUWmLtvwwjA5CunLA43mTPiaM3Lg= 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=DHMYWxAz; 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="DHMYWxAz" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gnuweeb.org; s=new2025; t=1754438735; bh=bj+RZzaHVNpoliwAGa9XYm5UNfnwharwglOw4U7Tgek=; 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=DHMYWxAzEHmz4jrtg4O2K9dt+cvr7lk8rcZbxE7YxjADTg88lqrB0djeyOMu8zMbl 7QydPwCg4ew9mpGnnokAdOBscZ9CCVFk7mUlUVVL4pj/mv7IdmZc3FsS2VHCPseB02 mdEeOw0aeX1EG5pOH5zHWD2HbdQOBpPqtd2re1Si1JsAw7iIc87jDeG/XsmDEZlwJX 2GCMUGkDDoP7MyEY7QvLtC1gq52P8+0W+znBjcEKdnucdiWYMgmURuu/Q1aIVCrrT7 p9L90MNfz3R5WAA3t1FGqC44hyPwGQFSvs4516pCBVXMt6fvprekpkUO7bAUhLzIAV E6wm0DosSW6kA== Received: from linux.gnuweeb.org (unknown [182.253.126.229]) by server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F29A3127C24; Wed, 6 Aug 2025 00:05:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Gw-Bpl: wU/cy49Bu1yAPm0bW2qiliFUIEVf+EkEatAboK6pk2H2LSy2bfWlPAiP3YIeQ5aElNkQEhTV9Q== Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 07:05:29 +0700 From: Ammar Faizi To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Simon Horman , Oliver Neukum , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , 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> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: X-Machine-Hash: hUx9VaHkTWcLO7S8CQCslj6OzqBx2hfLChRz45nPESx5VSB/xuJQVOKOB1zSXE3yc9ntP27bV1M1 On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 06:56:20AM +0700, Ammar Faizi wrote: > Apart from moving it outside that if-statement, unlink_urbs() call > should probably also be guarded as we agreed it makes no sense to call > it when we're turning the link on. Oh, no. I just realized, it does need to be guarded because if netif_carrier_on() is placed before the if (!netif_carrier_ok(dev->net)), it already clears __LINK_STATE_NOCARRIER. -- Ammar Faizi