From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2689CC4332F for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 04:43:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229726AbiJNEnN (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 00:43:13 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37838 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229548AbiJNEnI (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 00:43:08 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB67718F246; Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com with SMTP id f14so2605262qvo.3; Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:42:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xDtHrOYP4APIibnIFGeB3Yw3zgEryhyhvr48A52nfvo=; b=Ro7TzmXcPOJdpoVECzcFljxgM8dhXLxteFJY68WpVligO/yeqNeWMB5o+6aRph7B9Q dAE6NZx4KGimtxPGnL1kLXCOPIHNmRiyDU4POvLb4mwvAq2zas3X8vQPpH8nWhVfvuOH VKOvzSZ4X2MYO6ae/Ll6gSN01EnDLyEwsz8dVJvdGZBALt0abPyLqHfYvX/kVw1NMl+E uK0Hydtuk5ORtoODQfl9Q5Jld/FwG725CxnP8+PKX5I+ZSQz96XVzdsmWVuIbuGv1vUE 1JEXLVsKNOSlk5/9/JWdr5w88V3W35K/zh6crAdTSFhum0DhClXlyHT+sre8H/yIb7rR wPuQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=xDtHrOYP4APIibnIFGeB3Yw3zgEryhyhvr48A52nfvo=; b=7xcVlvcI+9b+yyUMTGFNbPOFy+jWywlTo50KjN8sWeDVNPO2WPpmuuayDiaN8E/cyR tI0DBaMPs+2QKdreoDlP/Tu3IjyKbjIGMxC5V+rsDo4cx9RncT7ME7HOpM56a+YeAanw HDpdG66jg8/+wPYhXUjx/fRuVLf/CmerOi9E41pRfOcBG4zqxnLwVGS3o4seiitfxKto bgubke4ZDZ9ICYpru5YUZVQErcVw1GY3gu11WazY61Aqh7ors81GtLrdLLhnCpythdl+ xnguuNgRy80arZSdHkv4rsVMdTZyOCZlqY3DCn+XN6GGMlJ6/GiqC64Ca+WMCxlP6LNE Ym0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0V4/lu+E57xE5oDO6qgjvExHeVfU38n0Zo0MY7U7cx3zdStkvn 2/m+TPsSby9N4upDplvJRBWFSZAausI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6qhS54c16AjFMowoyApUDec+Ds+Np3mRIhBzyLU7P3dUyWXlfLYyYzI3M8wpklAAgbBYkHoA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:29ee:b0:4b1:c1d2:6635 with SMTP id jv14-20020a05621429ee00b004b1c1d26635mr2821399qvb.82.1665722563289; Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2601:4c1:c100:2270:a669:acbb:c756:5d9a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id br15-20020a05620a460f00b006bbb07ebd83sm1498758qkb.108.2022.10.13.21.42.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:42:41 -0700 From: Yury Norov To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: guoren@kernel.org, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, caraitto@google.com, willemb@google.com, jonolson@google.com, amritha.nambiar@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Guo Ren Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] net: Fixup netif_attrmask_next_and warning Message-ID: References: <20221014030459.3272206-1-guoren@kernel.org> <20221014030459.3272206-2-guoren@kernel.org> <20221013203544.110a143c@kernel.org> <20221013203911.2705eccc@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221013203911.2705eccc@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 08:39:11PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 20:35:44 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > Can we instead revert 854701ba4c and take the larger rework Yury > > has posted a week ago into net-next? > > Oh, it was reposted today: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221013234349.1165689-2-yury.norov@gmail.com/ > > But we need a revert of 854701ba4c as well to cover the issue back up > for 6.1, AFAIU. The patch 854701ba4c is technically correct. I fixed most of warnings in advance, but nobody can foresee everything, right? I expected some noise, and now we have just a few things to fix. This is what for -rc releases exist, didn't they? I suggest to keep the patch, because this is the only way to make cpumask_check()-related issues visible to people. If things will go as they go now, I expect that -rc3 will be clean from cpumask_check() warnings. Thanks, Yury