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 00F0223ABAD; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 07:23:13 +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=1750922594; cv=none; b=uxG/D4iOqQORRhDqPLFmmWt2kQnQy2Ak8DOJTpmYP9tfRCkJ4ZlVNtm3Kl0YVc6VO3jTA+knBE8TdBJeguTpApqUKFE7Rjfu9jm8HeyxwtW9loqT41Ni6upGeYNUvmgqwC3S6eolhQu+VhICrPrOJgIunVQbfSuGIW5arzkl+NY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750922594; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dSPoY0RTF1Wz7DfHLCqbTmsTIUvPWjfQthz5/822Et8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FvcrOZRSB35+ebVkaZTEsqPDd/uUr7l6lrXqDs1wEaVZoGRmYSVgA5i/TWGWLbnM+KR5d1qeMcesiNOPt2mkZR2a3Oi8Jqk9c957F0Iu780dHPDahOCbO7eMM3Ej2v5srKY3Lb9uhff6w00YBcQ6rhsVWnVnGfxxmi2O9yvpuik= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=aVGcUQv6; 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="aVGcUQv6" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 404EDC4CEEB; Thu, 26 Jun 2025 07:23:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1750922593; bh=dSPoY0RTF1Wz7DfHLCqbTmsTIUvPWjfQthz5/822Et8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=aVGcUQv6TheU857JqgXR7TFkxH3ZjZlChGuDicn+jBA6zuQVryeNpGhk55jj6jfsE 01yDToqQFgLs0rlffFNCCu83JmoqQn+k6ifjjVwhaZNAvkzG9orc0xZeCc61rULHdI JWXfKtHvNQvRBiDqe9g+58fNjHyDkEnSDnT3+Y/J4QkUKQ+s0uiGJbjD+S6wyMcR7Y yQz5aj7uza849zT6OIm1/RCi15qdmkXuBUaL1C8/J1Vbz0Xsf1dNqHwh3Sm2O9XYFt HoOKPLvwaidLCENWzL8xc6ZvKpOR/tDNS2QyEsCmWDHHsgVhA9OuOdQ1AEgfIGwCzT i4Ch+zvhw5GGw== Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:23:08 +0100 From: Simon Horman To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Wei Fang , Claudiu Manoil , Vladimir Oltean , Clark Wang , "andrew+netdev@lunn.ch" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "edumazet@google.com" , "pabeni@redhat.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "imx@lists.linux.dev" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/3] change some statistics to 64-bit Message-ID: <20250626072308.GQ1562@horms.kernel.org> References: <20250624101548.2669522-1-wei.fang@nxp.com> <20250624181143.6206a518@kernel.org> <20250625163459.GD152961@horms.kernel.org> <20250625133224.275a8635@kernel.org> 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: <20250625133224.275a8635@kernel.org> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 01:32:24PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:34:59 +0100 Simon Horman wrote: > > > Simon has posted a patch [1] to fix the sparse warnings. Do I need to wait until > > > Simon's patch is applied to the net-next tree and then resend this patch set? > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/imx/20250624-etnetc-le-v1-1-a73a95d96e4e@kernel.org/ > > > > Yes, I have confirmed that with patch[1] applied this patch-set > > does not introduce any Sparse warnings (in my environment). > > > > I noticed the Sparse warnings that are otherwise introduced when reviewing > > v1 of this patchset which is why I crated patch[1]. > > > > The issue is that there is are long standing Sparse warnings - which > > highlight a driver bug, albeit one that doesn't manifest with in tree > > users. They is due to an unnecessary call to le64_to_cpu(). The warnings > > are: > > > > .../enetc_hw.h:513:16: warning: cast to restricted __le64 > > .../enetc_hw.h:513:16: warning: restricted __le64 degrades to integer > > .../enetc_hw.h:513:16: warning: cast to restricted __le64 > > > > Patches 2/3 and 3/3 multiply the incidence of the above 3 warnings because > > they increase the callers of the inline function where the problem lies. > > > > But I'd argue that, other than noise, they don't make things worse. > > The bug doesn't manifest for in-tree users (and if it did, it would > > have been manifesting anyway). > > > > So I'd advocate accepting this series (or not) independent of resolving > > the Sparse warnings. Which should disappear when patch[1], or some variant > > thereof, is accepted (via net or directly into net-next). > > All fair points, but unfortunately if there is a build issue > the patches are not fed into the full CI cycle. Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. > Simon's fix > will hit net-next tomorrow, let's get these reposted tomorrow > so we can avoid any (unlikely) surprises? Yes, agreed. Let's avoid surprises.