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 AE9F5C13D; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 01:04:51 +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=1719363891; cv=none; b=bhNkyKeEwDCyLH3LumOgLIdNAGyFwhb6wfQd6CveFLydUihw+C9JDMTsLWFxE2OGkbYkedoFxF/4XlyfAozIi1WamH2tUCNVYD9hXu8pTiio3AyUJSoN2VLsvMMI4YdydcV6yd3OP3TPMk6iAqqp+LjSu5IYIxSQ1Od6shJDa3U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719363891; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FHzW/DVKidcZT55HraJ3rhZSFrRW8mJxc3kQAWC95Gs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=nISufea3Q2oeAz2TjRQ/t7CNdA+luPqFuIV0D3j32Bgz/tsPrHr8hnIhs5Rt67JBvJMmvl54qh9OMa6cgmf6SR0lq0/j6YJGgYpK59pQyNp/HmFZtx6Sk3yCG0chFioV3n+4CDL9rmOZD9UWuRZErVCUtMR28Km90RsO3cQm7dY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=kvCoGavG; 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="kvCoGavG" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BB38C32781; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 01:04:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1719363891; bh=FHzW/DVKidcZT55HraJ3rhZSFrRW8mJxc3kQAWC95Gs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=kvCoGavGJy9+7Hj/x+hf/g88Vpgl+wkF25XLiOBfR2LiLhig/PGTtQpLPsT7oc5iP 91T2DeilXrLwtJRPDzgz5suMh65zL2P4w4LHKza1BoMZyqlWloqny1YhDZXxlU3aGf YYVktBdbT26jkQD5uEoLEVGRyr0pGsYGV1J7nYR3eURpXjP7ZI38JIObBGAJd0neJU wbV9TJ4lq99L7bkhj8dWDgu3j7m4vB2sC9B0TKgxzTVfNGSLJDBsaVctdSDTfM3jqL LRQEqtKzaUQuCbMT0AcyQ19YVcr/TcUZ/7qXpQxDXA87g48I18kpYx1aYyR+ONAH4L 5qpvpb6j0lLtw== Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 18:04:49 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Suman Ghosh Cc: Markus Elfring , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , LKML , "David S. Miller" , Jerin Jacob , Eric Dumazet , Geethasowjanya Akula , Hariprasad Kelam , Linu Cherian , Paolo Abeni , Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta , Sunil Kovvuri Goutham Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [net PATCH v2 0/7] octeontx2-af: Fix klockwork issues in AF driver Message-ID: <20240625180449.64e5feb1@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20240625173350.1181194-1-sumang@marvell.com> <8fd713c2-5b85-4223-8a06-f2cedc2a1fb8@web.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 18:34:55 +0000 Suman Ghosh wrote: > * Why did you not directly respond to the recurring patch review concern >=20 > about better summary phrases (or message subjects)? >=20 > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__git.kernel.org_p= ub_scm_linux_kernel_git_torvalds_linux.git_tree_Documentation_process_submi= tting-2Dpatches.rst-3Fh-3Dv6.10-2Drc5-23n646&d=3DDwIFaQ&c=3DnKjWec2b6R0mOyP= az7xtfQ&r=3D7si3Xn9Ly-Se1a655kvEPIYU0nQ9HPeN280sEUv5ROU&m=3Dtyo7VgAvJ4PW3on= ftljYvIjrznQ9gYDoeBImOruW9-jUya4QuUMNK2qYOPd2dJK3&s=3DwYjJjR6jScQdlXWCRWzeG= 3SidVq0MRYYjMlDPBGMJI8&e=3D >=20 > [Suman] I thought the =E2=80=9Csummery phrase=E2=80=9D is per patch. The = cover letter is mentioning the reason for the change and each patch set is = adding the summery for the change. Since it is not some actual =E2=80=98fix= =E2=80=99 I am not sure what more to add other than mentioning klockwork fi= xes. I am not sure what more can be added for a variable initialization to = zero or adding a NULL check. Can you suggest some? >=20 >=20 >=20 > * Would you like to explain any more here which development concern categ= ories >=20 > were picked up from the mentioned source code analysis tool? >=20 > [Suman] Development concerns are mentioned in individual patch sets. Hav= ing junk value in the variable if not initialized or accessing a NULL point= er, etc. >=20 >=20 >=20 > * How much do you care for the grouping of logical changes into >=20 > consistent patch series? >=20 > [Suman] I thought about it but then I was not sure how to add fix tags fo= r a unified patch set. Hence went with per file approach. Do you see any pr= oblem with the approach? Please configure your MUA to quote correctly, with > characters.