From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com>
Cc: Ronak Doshi <ronak.doshi@broadcom.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Andy King <acking@vmware.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Raphael Isemann <teemperor@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] vmxnet3: Fix inconsistent DMA accesses
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 16:16:15 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241118161615.2d0f101b@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOZ5it3cgGB6D8jsFp2oRCY5DpO5hoomsi-OvP+55R2cfwkGgA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 08:31:35 -0700 Brian Johannesmeyer wrote:
> > But committing patch 1 just
> > to completely revert it in patch 2 seems a little odd.
>
> Indeed, this was a poor choice on my part. I suppose the correct way
> to do this would be to submit them separately (as opposed to as a
> series)? I.e.: (i) one patch to start adding the synchronization
> operations (in case `adapter` should indeed be in a DMA region), and
> (ii) a second patch to remove `adapter` from a DMA region? Based on
> the feedback, I can submit a V2 patch for either (i) or (ii).
What is the purpose of the first patch? Is it sufficient to make
the device work correctly?
If yes, why do we need patch 2.
If no, why do we have patch 1, instead of a revert / patch 2...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-19 0:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-13 19:59 [PATCH 0/2] vmxnet3: Fix inconsistent DMA accesses Brian Johannesmeyer
2024-11-13 20:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] vmxnet3: Fix inconsistent DMA accesses in vmxnet3_probe_device() Brian Johannesmeyer
2024-11-13 20:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] vmxnet3: Remove adapter from DMA region Brian Johannesmeyer
2024-11-15 3:38 ` [PATCH 0/2] vmxnet3: Fix inconsistent DMA accesses Jakub Kicinski
2024-11-18 15:31 ` Brian Johannesmeyer
2024-11-19 0:16 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2024-11-19 17:10 ` Brian Johannesmeyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20241118161615.2d0f101b@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=acking@vmware.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=ronak.doshi@broadcom.com \
--cc=teemperor@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).