From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 F1733329C60 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 12:40:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777034446; cv=none; b=ZwnqLPuA0GjLfHFAt1MekIuMcZ5/6WHpP7lnZSH4vn+lc9dGAbyVhf2xXMMwkOIVI2mX/rJVdjcVliS+AgNZmzWoSRgBIeVS+bPnJbF3jPYqwnJ5qrMLeaitxSpRPvHCivqCyiiTB258RUhsCI0NGPx+uo/TF04V/rGrnYqz0+Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777034446; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Os6slKuiLGxBWiHsIraIVXqi+PiGactCEycWMtcaDv8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=ja0PYL6JlL0ZoAn2H+U+afBLNpgVPveHRBgCwoDHe3rMb5U89mY/nrIhmAIuKEUgTzklJCtKZ3Ls0D68OAk8kXLoVHQwkqkJ8i8cpsyphmoX8PwEJk0OWvW6TmtoYBBbx/JLVbZx0EvhdOBstgHqR+YOR8V6fyiABuE3ixbCz94= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=h+SAXkBp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="h+SAXkBp" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1777034444; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Os6slKuiLGxBWiHsIraIVXqi+PiGactCEycWMtcaDv8=; b=h+SAXkBpJm+asdboB9Mkae32R5TC7fNP8IaVzvyciucf7OtJjffyPK1Zum659bdghrD/J0 kkWLmrrAwHjcVvPfQgePo2TrbERY55qFw+srwy30AsSjW2zV6AWjDFv85NWat5FTk3KUu5 GbdNotURPsmIuJpa+3ZU849zlhFlLxA= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-99-KXYT9KXtN8O36aMG-Drc7w-1; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 08:40:40 -0400 X-MC-Unique: KXYT9KXtN8O36aMG-Drc7w-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: KXYT9KXtN8O36aMG-Drc7w_1777034438 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84E00180034F; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 12:40:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora.redhat.com (unknown [10.44.32.29]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FFE519560AB; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 12:40:32 +0000 (UTC) From: Jose Ignacio Tornos Martinez To: aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com Cc: anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, jacob.e.keller@intel.com, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, jtornosm@redhat.com, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com Subject: RE: [PATCH net v4 4/4] ice: skip unnecessary VF reset when setting trust Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 14:40:31 +0200 Message-ID: <20260424124031.834241-1-jtornosm@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 Hello Aleksandr, >>> You declare ice_vf_clear_all_promisc_modes() returning int, but >>> ignore the return value. >>> Looks suspicious isn't it? >> Well, it is used like that when the funciton is called locally (the >> function is not modifiedi, just made public), and really my intention >> was to clean as much as possible (so error checking is not necessary). >> In my opinion it would be enough to warn about the possible problems >> (already done in the existing function). > Can you go extra mile and add error code handling? > Or at least document it in the code why you don't do it? Ok, I can add the error handling in ice_setup_vf_trust and an extra warning to indicate that promiscuous mode clear failed when revoking trust. Just let me wait a bit longer for more possible reviews to create the next version of the series. Thanks Best regards Jose Ignacio