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 D6DEB28F3; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 00:27:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707784038; cv=none; b=nsuRWA2bbRnTJrtziqBFTHkLZTUqzozophR+fR3MtqCEWfFthc8VQeWcb0/bws4NczCJFfcXtr46Auum6OOwDHgFT1OH4pGl17eobGoVkDZ/g2dc0aVEVW10zjJoEZvWZ6PookEVhwVjTEM0Uvkw68DfghrIwWfrDna++L4EhIY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707784038; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xa2oLixYH54yKOS4wx6qyOKj3uS0moEuwKs5rzbxVJk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=KFz7fJul5MqcJM6Cr2psHjN8lBpZyxc4zRpnDXrFoak39M4qnJnF4oQZp4XndTcwiVXQ4okuGH1VHn6flikz4EvTCoittFWcFeEScQR4o0pw3wN6U9wgPtKj8vO95JMeHYbTd1nRvD3lRtyxBDjRMP9EG3up79HYeQKya+W7iYw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ABBRO/lf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ABBRO/lf" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1DC05C433F1; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 00:27:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1707784038; bh=xa2oLixYH54yKOS4wx6qyOKj3uS0moEuwKs5rzbxVJk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ABBRO/lf+/k9i2TOlc4qooYhDRcwXRi7Ka14CzL8TjCZtDzhKEUMNhFq75QCzFVGX l4c42f/jRbjPmLDblX2KoJ5ZJj51pTdm3+rK39DSckdfOq9Xf/kJ5B4FJ3AAX7Pjkd PRB9HXw7FcLjW2ozIoGRRO40Om/4saTN3TCbOg62JQpldimqRGSqWp7ayl//XJ0E0Y N7XePU+CtHkStu8zLvxCuQ925hD1cxoDm4GdKHwOeXMVZokl75icfdFb+JJ0ptBSNA BwmXL5ywJha3ezjx1TgD2HxOoUMhBvxs7UXXxgirNG/cIuQLLxjoXd071/3q5iCnj0 tShUm13obv+Tw== Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:27:17 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Horatiu Vultur Cc: , , , , , , Michal Swiatkowski Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] lan966x: Fix crash when adding interface under a lag Message-ID: <20240212162717.2c8cb74e@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20240212083229.tg3cabp4iee3p6tq@DEN-DL-M31836.microchip.com> References: <20240206123054.3052966-1-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> <20240209135220.42e670d4@kernel.org> <20240212081038.cbsb2exfmcxxntzq@DEN-DL-M31836.microchip.com> <20240212083229.tg3cabp4iee3p6tq@DEN-DL-M31836.microchip.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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 09:32:29 +0100 Horatiu Vultur wrote: > > You are right, the lan966x_lag_get_mask() will not set a bit for a port > > that doesn't exist[1]. Therefore this check is not needed. > > > > [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_lag.c#L354 > > While trying to rebase on net, the next version of this patch, I have seen that > actually this version was accepted even though it was marked as "Changes > Requested". > The commit sha is: 15faa1f67ab405d47789d4702f587ec7df7ef03e > > How do you prefer to go forward from here? > - do you want to revert this and then I will send a new version? > - should I send a patch that just removes this unneeded check? > - any other suggestion? Sorry about that, I must have forgotten to reset the tree after viewing and didn't spot this between Brenos patches :S No big deal, let's leave it as is.