NFC for next-20260609

NFC for next-20260609

[David Heidelberg]

The following changes since commit 4549871118cf616eecdd2d939f78e3b9e1dddc48:

   Linux 7.1-rc7 (2026-06-07 15:37:58 -0700)

are available in the Git repository at:

   https://codeberg.org/linux-nfc/linux.git tags/nfc-for-next-20260609

for you to fetch changes up to f6696b7206c3bd276bf81d5953a1489bf43dd783:

   nfc: digital: clamp SENSF_RES length to the destination buffer (2026-06-09 
10:12:52 +0200)

----------------------------------------------------------------
nfc pull request for net:

  - llcp: avoid userspace overflow on invalid optlen
  - llcp: read llcp_sock->local under the socket lock in getsockopt
  - nci: fix use of uninitialized memory in CORE_INIT_RSP parsing
  - nci: fix double completion race in nci_data_exchange_complete
  - nci: uart: Constify struct tty_ldisc_ops
  - nxp-nci: Add ISO15693 support
  - nxp-nci: treat -ENXIO in IRQ thread as no data available
  - digital: clamp SENSF_RES length to the destination buffer
  - trf7970a: fix comment typos
  - MAINTAINERS: Update address for David Heidelberg

----------------------------------------------------------------
Breno Leitao (2):
       nfc: llcp: avoid userspace overflow on invalid optlen
       nfc: llcp: read llcp_sock->local under the socket lock in getsockopt

Carl Lee (2):
       nfc: nxp-nci: Add ISO15693 support
       nfc: nxp-nci: treat -ENXIO in IRQ thread as no data available

Christophe JAILLET (1):
       nfc: nci: uart: Constify struct tty_ldisc_ops

David Heidelberg (1):
       MAINTAINERS: Update address for David Heidelberg

Doruk Tan Ozturk (1):
       nfc: digital: clamp SENSF_RES length to the destination buffer

Miles Krause (1):
       nfc: trf7970a: fix comment typos

Yun Zhou (1):
       nfc: nci: fix use of uninitialized memory in CORE_INIT_RSP parsing

Zhenghang Xiao (1):
       nfc: nci: fix double completion race in nci_data_exchange_complete

  MAINTAINERS                  |  2 +-
  drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/core.c   |  1 +
  drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/i2c.c    |  8 ++++++++
  drivers/nfc/trf7970a.c       |  6 +++---
  net/nfc/digital_technology.c |  2 ++
  net/nfc/llcp_sock.c          | 14 +++++++++++---
  net/nfc/nci/data.c           | 10 +++++-----
  net/nfc/nci/rsp.c            | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
  net/nfc/nci/uart.c           |  2 +-
  9 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

Re: NFC for next-20260609

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 10:45:21 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:
> The following changes since commit 4549871118cf616eecdd2d939f78e3b9e1dddc48:
> 
>    Linux 7.1-rc7 (2026-06-07 15:37:58 -0700)

This should be based on net-next if you're sending a PR to net-next.

Normal flow of history is something like:

 net-next - x - x - ... - x - merge - x - ...
          \                  /     \
           `- x - x - x - x [PR]    ` x - ...

Note that net and net-next do the same dance of periodic merges,
and net does a periodic dance with Linus's tree, which is how
we get changes propagate from the tree with fixes to -next trees.

Problem 2 - the subject says next but the tag says "nfc pull request
for net:", which one is it? :)
    ^^^

Could you rebase the patches on top of net-next if that's your intended
target or net if you meant net?

Re: NFC for next-20260609

[David Heidelberg]

On 10/06/2026 17:48, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 10:45:21 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:
>> The following changes since commit 4549871118cf616eecdd2d939f78e3b9e1dddc48:
>>
>>     Linux 7.1-rc7 (2026-06-07 15:37:58 -0700)
> 
> This should be based on net-next if you're sending a PR to net-next.
> 
> Normal flow of history is something like:
> 
>   net-next - x - x - ... - x - merge - x - ...
>            \                  /     \
>             `- x - x - x - x [PR]    ` x - ...
> 
> Note that net and net-next do the same dance of periodic merges,
> and net does a periodic dance with Linus's tree, which is how
> we get changes propagate from the tree with fixes to -next trees.
> 
> Problem 2 - the subject says next but the tag says "nfc pull request
> for net:", which one is it? :)
>      ^^^
> 
> Could you rebase the patches on top of net-next if that's your intended
> target or net if you meant net?

So the batch was intended to go into 7.2, should I target net-next or directly 
net in this case?

David

Re: NFC for next-20260609

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Thu, 11 Jun 2026 14:14:01 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:
> On 10/06/2026 17:48, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 10:45:21 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:  
> >> The following changes since commit 4549871118cf616eecdd2d939f78e3b9e1dddc48:
> >>
> >>     Linux 7.1-rc7 (2026-06-07 15:37:58 -0700)  
> > 
> > This should be based on net-next if you're sending a PR to net-next.
> > 
> > Normal flow of history is something like:
> > 
> >   net-next - x - x - ... - x - merge - x - ...
> >            \                  /     \
> >             `- x - x - x - x [PR]    ` x - ...
> > 
> > Note that net and net-next do the same dance of periodic merges,
> > and net does a periodic dance with Linus's tree, which is how
> > we get changes propagate from the tree with fixes to -next trees.
> > 
> > Problem 2 - the subject says next but the tag says "nfc pull request
> > for net:", which one is it? :)
> >      ^^^
> > 
> > Could you rebase the patches on top of net-next if that's your intended
> > target or net if you meant net?  
> 
> So the batch was intended to go into 7.2, should I target net-next or directly 
> net in this case?

Doesn't matter right now since the merge window is really close.
But looks like a mix of fixes and improvements. Having patches
that CC stable and basic code changes in one PR is a bit of 
a red flag. The fixes should should go to net, and the improvements
to net-next.

Right now probably best to respin for net-next, we don't want to
have to take the non-urgent stuff via net at this stag.e