Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/2] net: hsr: require valid EOT supervision TLV

Fernando Fernandez Mancera
2026-04-01T13:44:20Z

On 4/1/26 3:31 PM, Luka Gejak wrote:
> On April 1, 2026 2:05:49 PM GMT+02:00, Fernando Fernandez Mancera <fmancera@suse.de> wrote:
>> On 4/1/26 1:06 PM, Luka Gejak wrote:
>>> On April 1, 2026 11:52:02 AM GMT+02:00, Fernando Fernandez Mancera <fmancera@suse.de> wrote:
>>>> On 4/1/26 11:23 AM, luka.gejak@linux.dev wrote:
>>>>> From: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>
>>>>>
>>>>> Supervision frames are only valid if terminated with a zero-length EOT
>>>>> TLV. The current check fails to reject non-EOT entries as the terminal
>>>>> TLV, potentially allowing malformed supervision traffic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix this by strictly requiring the terminal TLV to be HSR_TLV_EOT
>>>>> with a length of zero.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Felix Maurer <fmaurer@redhat.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This has not been reviewed by Felix. Felix provided his Reviewed-by tag for the v1 which was completely different than this.
>>>>
>>>> Revisions of this patch:
>>>>
>>>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260329112313.17164-4-luka.gejak@linux.dev/
>>>>
>>>> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260326154715.38405-4-luka.gejak@linux.dev/
>>>>
>>>> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260324143503.187642-4-luka.gejak@linux.dev/
>>>>
>>>> Are these contributions LLM/AI generated? I believe so based on the email history.
>>>>
>>>> AI generated review on rtl8723bs: https://lore.kernel.org/all/B2394A3C-25FD-4CEA-8557-3E68F1F60357@linux.dev/
>>>>
>>>> Another AI generated review on rtl8723bs: https://lore.kernel.org/all/3831D599-655E-40B2-9E5D-9DF956013088@linux.dev/
>>>>
>>>> Likely an AI generated review on a 1 year old HSR patch: https://lore.kernel.org/all/DHFG26KI6L23.1YCOVQ5SSYMO5@linux.dev/
>>>>
>>>> If these are indeed, AI generated contributions or reviews they should be disclosed beforehand. Also there is the Assisted-by: tag. Also note that developer must take full responsibility for the contribution which means understanding it completely.
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.kernel.org/process/coding-assistants.html#signed-off-by-and-developer-certificate-of-origin
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Fernando.
>>>
>>> Hi Fernando,
>>> About the Reviewed-by tag, that was my mistake. I forgot to remove it
>>> when rebasing. And about AI. I’ve been using it to help format my
>>> emails and translate them into English since it isn't my native
>>> language. However, the technical logic and the code itself are my own
>>> work, written without AI.
>>
>> So I don't think this change in code is related to rebasing at all. The code in this function is identical when comparing net and net-next tree so why a rebase would cause such change in the code? Am I missing something here?
>>
>> In addition to that, the new logic does not make any sense. What motivated the diff from v3 to v4? All that information is missing.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Fernando.
>>
>> Should I send v5, and if so, what should I
>>> do besides stripping the Reviewed-by tag? I've read the documentation
>>> on coding assistants you linked and will make sure to follow it on the
>>> next revision.
>>> Best regards,
>>> Luka Gejak
>>>
>>
>
> Hi Fernando,
> These 2 patches were in the same patch series as 2 other patches.
> Then, when rebasing to edit 3rd patch in original patch series(3/4), I
> forgot to remove the Reviewed-by tag(I ran git commit --amend
> --no-edit). Then I separated 1st 2 and 2nd 2 patches into separate
> series (one for net and other for net-next) because I was instructed
> to do so by Jakub Kicinski. His email:
>> I think that patches 1 and 2 need to go to net with a Fixes tag.
>> They look like run of the mill bug fixes. 3 and 4 are logical
>> fixes and change behavior so net-next makes sense.
>>

This is not addressing my concern. I am not complaining that it went
into a separate series. That makes sense. The v3 version of the patch
"net: hsr: require valid EOT supervision TLV" is now something
completely different but the commit message is the same.

v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260329112313.17164-4-luka.gejak@linux.dev/

I could guess the reason is that in order to make sure the last TLV is a
EOT TLV with 0 length but all that explanation is missing on the commit
message.

>> FWIW AI has something to say about patch 3, I did not investigate:
>> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260329112313.17164-2-luka.gejak@linux.dev
>> --
>> pw-bot: cr