From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 D4216747B for ; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 18:44:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IDHq0az/" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8265CC433C8; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 18:43:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1699123448; bh=FRSsNlZJRtAZ5520gkXj+6trkOaEEcULj4EvVUaXbtY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IDHq0az/yX80JwqXHI8tYIp+m+fW2NYTgUpXtHrcwZba/KC6xJd83u2uUma6pVdtG 6DYZpO1MYHy9Fbo7RIbTcofNQBWjCnzr0EzUsHM0fdbY1FabSs6jvJpIvuEFdXVhTd nZaA4pDpaDzATLCBoj1901PK/9qDmml+8NiTqoK/qyPJxMhenTFHYI+waU1xIe4RFV Ej0b9zDf7Yvtn98DY53by0bDKoFwKkG00Krj0IZPp0dGD16Ubdu6PKGWKH1ppLfhYw Wm5PGgkpjbpnZsio+i6x3wjT8buqaTvSYR1cewxGpCM8vMb+MhYQFPP3HOtoB8mmse 7KZaldMFlQAmg== Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2023 14:43:31 -0400 From: Simon Horman To: Jan Kiszka Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , MD Danish Anwar , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Lopes Ivo, Diogo Miguel (T CED IFD-PT)" , Nishanth Menon , "Su, Bao Cheng (RC-CN DF FA R&D)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ti: icssg-prueth: Add missing icss_iep_put to error path Message-ID: <20231104184331.GP891380@kernel.org> References: <0b21ba4e-5c47-4625-a9ec-e45e54ba9229@siemens.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@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: <0b21ba4e-5c47-4625-a9ec-e45e54ba9229@siemens.com> On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 05:03:30PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > From: Jan Kiszka > > Analogously to prueth_remove. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka Hi Jan, I am a little unclear if this patch addresses a user-visible bug, or is adding a new feature. If it is fixing a bug then it should be targeted at the net tree. It should apply cleanly there, and the tree should be noted in the subject. Subject: [PATCH net] ... Also, if it is a bug fix, it should have a fixes tag, indicating the revision(s) where the problem was introduced. This to assist in backporting fixes. In this case perhaps the following is appropriate: On the other hand, if this is a new feature, then it should be targeted at net-next: Subject: [PATCH net-next] ... And in that case the following applies. In either case, I think it would be good to expand the commit message. It should explain why this change is being made. ## Form letter - net-next-closed The merge window for v6.7 has begun and therefore net-next is closed for new drivers, features, code refactoring and optimizations. We are currently accepting bug fixes only. Please repost when net-next reopens after November 12th. RFC patches sent for review only are obviously welcome at any time. See: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#development-cycle -- pw-bot: cr