From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.secunet.com (mx1.secunet.com [62.96.220.36]) (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 BA91B36164F for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2026 09:31:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.96.220.36 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773739875; cv=none; b=RRoXCOrlt+v+S7YeqFm/0k23fQaaDxO/HvlHWAkOwvn3rLsAcfdUrQ/DeEQi+e5+FSwcdmYCQA3zZLjuDhRr9WR5OQtudcOCmjqRFBxWl9f/HVu0SVlYddnfpTwUsUrkV/AM7+KZ/3Jv5x9eVgK9wytToClebG7Q4h7cjNdiYmA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773739875; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bRE/EtH3xPYe8k457Z7er8BWyQlZxCv1IfN+A1qtpoc=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=JEbkEvwNtYgMbMLADKGOj/a0ESBwpM+2M/4SaN3OcHSiKLhyoAIvP14q54OPUmrKqTlcHVjd7LxONfSI15hyl1Bgsb12+kbumzRnw+jqhObrkri4ohvqOqNVPxWqifIGGTTSIwf0uIGSNSiypn+25pwdrvlt5cGJf7XoVnVin9Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=secunet.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=secunet.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=secunet.com header.i=@secunet.com header.b=fKoexbSL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.96.220.36 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=secunet.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=secunet.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=secunet.com header.i=@secunet.com header.b="fKoexbSL" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B299C207B3; Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:31:10 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet Received: from mx1.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx1.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UfAyDrfqQm8f; Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:31:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from EXCH-01.secunet.de (rl1.secunet.de [10.32.0.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E01F207D1; Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:31:10 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.secunet.com 2E01F207D1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=secunet.com; s=202301; t=1773739870; bh=PI3jjADnzckh9xb4VbsB8JreqJnn1LrgTwTj+GjbA5M=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=fKoexbSLwf/lt5JYeIcFOjaBMsm11RagbYGO4v20a24zuzmAlkJHitTaWHGUOE/F0 Hm4aGGxT2W0dPlevXkn0TWnfqZ7H4CCCenBLsbE7DJCznrHdWIRIsjjVbmIKAK379v S2B/MWFWLxfCgGZHvM8F1RIubt5XVgHEjACNd6Cm5dpaAWv8EW50ASl2IX+SVG3DTl OoRsjEX4T9XG1IAamDpoM5h0ptmVrWu42nid+QKBD7JGKzXfzfdOIMQ2DGcvMECFnz eFZiOr2l2seBm2/4WyAfLKAb7DgtFc1SBQ8F19pv05UnnUpPvjlvbhvidGouSp9oGV nc+3pTdkwwLLw== Received: from secunet.com (10.182.7.193) by EXCH-01.secunet.de (10.32.0.171) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.17; Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:31:09 +0100 Received: (nullmailer pid 1454644 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 17 Mar 2026 09:31:08 -0000 Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:31:08 +0100 From: Steffen Klassert To: Sabrina Dubroca CC: , Herbert Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next 00/10] xfrm: fix most sparse warnings Message-ID: References: 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" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ClientProxiedBy: EXCH-03.secunet.de (10.32.0.183) To EXCH-01.secunet.de (10.32.0.171) On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 08:48:17AM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 11:32:33AM +0100, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > This series fixes most of the sparse warnings currently reported about > > RCU pointers for files under net/xfrm. There's no actual bug in the > > current code, we only need to use the correct helpers in each context. > > > > Sabrina Dubroca (10): > > xfrm: state: fix sparse warnings on xfrm_state_hold_rcu > > xfrm: state: fix sparse warnings in xfrm_state_init > > xfrm: state: fix sparse warnings around XFRM_STATE_INSERT > > xfrm: state: add xfrm_state_deref_prot to state_by* walk under lock > > xfrm: remove rcu/state_hold from xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto > > xfrm: state: silence sparse warnings during netns exit > > xfrm: policy: fix sparse warnings in xfrm_policy_{init,fini} > > xfrm: policy: silence sparse warning in xfrm_policy_unregister_afinfo > > xfrm: add rcu_access_pointer to silence sparse warning for > > xfrm_input_afinfo > > xfrm: avoid RCU warnings around the per-netns netlink socket > > Series applied, thanks a ot Sabrina! I forgot to mention, I've pulled this into the ipsec tree as I consider this as fixes to get rid of these warnings and the regression risk is pretty low.