From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.ssi.bg (mx.ssi.bg [193.238.174.39]) (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 7E62751C04D; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 14:36:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.238.174.39 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790692596; cv=none; b=dtYaUwyh43IifeBPpOO1SO1pif2AB9IyCISVGphFgRATiQ3fkQZWyS5Ig8/jXRZ5JPoZFfwprD/3KrHPQbjYArF7gxW8D16SfC831tg4uROPxJQO2m5dxPBGmJOqjPGFWq1mOqN9msgIPfJYMGA1o5ZlPhfF9IGetGjoEAA/GVw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790692596; c=relaxed/simple; bh=41OyKo8AA7bmoCoxHe40VGXLS46yixBA+0eQ9aV4r94=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ceLpSGE9H3yj5f8kQWcQ+xrXT+bm3xbml6ouLFox59VS8R22PP4iaZx6NOTj8oU/qtESRo5jXy8S0L6IPowoe9NxZQBE7aLyuc64vOehego18fN+s8LSZXOy9Aksn9eat/A3HS2GtOFmFUru70pIshFJj5FW8h3ObCvq0VvbIhA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=ssi.bg; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ssi.bg; dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=ssi.bg header.i=@ssi.bg header.b=MytAsbfq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.238.174.39 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=ssi.bg Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ssi.bg Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=ssi.bg header.i=@ssi.bg header.b="MytAsbfq" Received: from mx.ssi.bg (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.ssi.bg (Potsfix) with ESMTP id 6529F213E8; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:36:23 +0300 (EEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ssi.bg; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:from:from:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=ssi; bh=EFJRJAmInJbL42OH66AUdL96HXKJcoSU80nlGp+WbKU=; b=MytAsbfqtEKX w2/DaNrFpgcJTC5FIpsAQAd4/UvKx4RoSCTbUU2kZ6EJlVYPW3pgfuIrNL390jAQ mKU1LIXqJrTp9QO0g4CA8CF2wwGQGbQsdV6/fZgWqLj5cxPYJj1HjYvAbWO1yiks yOBfSu88alxbrD2SqlPuz1zI0jBa6U6ZZl1UhUaHnj3kP57BmJgQ1VAzxtCtn6sz oxRF0w9ruNvg2vH1Yh/OlrY/QGyIowRHaG9U+R3cqUEcWSmo9kUUqp/H3wDgddX3 m6I8bkUxpF9Dlf6dWp4r6xXXd+YHYFD9ZNEw8j4Ma08Qx7DL/XwgNsXH/x5ChycE ZSaqL/d7MeDmSsZWMYLdN0/5FmOwGz1gGJHv+fX2vDBZ8Y1MO3AW9ZzWjc3GZwcN 52eILAiBJCvyX7/LyzKI62VcotGPhyZodmf+8B8apnwrz2y5fas+3tqbxguSDnLl U4kd3jZ3KGWjNyCwcKhZHAYo5yzYRS65IqgsERl0d5ePxzr4GIxfZ2lCiPsj4r1h /MQaj4NSm3qRTfiocFxT7XkrLN1h/cpS3phlx7tjqSF/Uh0n1+6BY1emoZ6VFa/O 636YY4PnIcN/h+PfSopgBDa+mkIt7V/eNIHYv2/ZP/ajQ/LMFI7VdZa4Ril1k4GN QpU9bJC7OGH5xiFx0gahXaFQ9d4+M5c= Received: from box.ssi.bg (box.ssi.bg [193.238.174.46]) by mx.ssi.bg (Potsfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:36:23 +0300 (EEST) Received: from ja.ssi.bg (unknown [213.16.62.126]) by box.ssi.bg (Potsfix) with ESMTPSA id B1510604D4; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:36:25 +0300 (EEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ja.ssi.bg (8.18.2/8.18.2) with ESMTP id 68TEaKQt060712; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:36:21 +0300 Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:36:20 +0300 (EEST) From: Julian Anastasov To: Pablo Neira Ayuso cc: Jakub Kicinski , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org, fw@strlen.de Subject: Re: [PATCH net 00/11] Netfilter/IPVS fixes for net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5d761dbe-b74c-4ebc-116b-34f2b60a69c9@ssi.bg> References: <20260927220816.268206-1-pablo@netfilter.org> <20260928191120.28c28fdb@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 Hello, On Tue, 29 Sep 2026, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > Hi Jakub, Paolo, > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 07:11:20PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 00:08:05 +0200 Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > The following batch contains Netfilter fixes for net: > > > > I didn't spot anything obviously needing a respin in the AI feedback, > > could you confirm that it's good as is? If you have to respin it'd be > > good to remove the claim that patch 2 is a nop, Linus is onto us for > > sending too many LLM-induced, low impact fixes. > > I would say yes too. LLM comments say: > > - Patch 2/11 (ipvs): commit description could be improved (yes, there > is always room for improvement in that regard but I think description > is fair fine enough). There is a report on a pre-existing issue, but > I think that can be addressed as a follow up. I already have v2 for 2/11, now as 2 patches: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260929113436.44306-1-ja%40ssi.bg But better to leave it for next week, it is a low priority fix. As usually, if we stop 1 patch, it is replaced by 2 for the next round :) > - Patch 3/11 (netfilter): commit description could be improved again, > but patch is good IMO. > > - Patch 7/11 (ipvs): there's seem to be another path to abuse this > code LLM found, I would address this as a follow up. > > - Patch 8/11 (netfilter): refers to a pre-existing issue. > It also refers to issues with reordering elements of the range, > but this API really need elements in order to work fine, otherwise > overlap detection will likely fire. > > - Patch 10/11 (netfilter): refers to a pre-existing issues. > nf_flow_offload_refresh() also needs to be disabled in pending > work is enqueued. Also disable stats fetching for dying hw entries. > > In particular, I am observing IPVS patches are getting stuck because > of reports of pre-existing issues. Sometimes you find two or three > things that need an adjustment, and you can start tackling one of the > aspects at a time (because addressing them all at once it not easy). > I think it will help Julian if he has a chance to address issues as > follow up, unless LLM reports something really sound and compelling > that can be classified as a blocker. I don't find the LLM reviews wrong, so I don't complain :) I'll note if a followup is preferred but in most of the time the patches need to be corrected. I try to post different patches for the different problems but this is also a load for the other maintainers. I hope I'll improve with the time but it is true that we are overloaded. The only hope is that the bug-report rate will slowdown with the time... Regards -- Julian Anastasov