From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.netfilter.org (mail.netfilter.org [217.70.190.124]) (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 CFBC04AF67F; Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:56:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.190.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789721783; cv=none; b=LTD7X50Y5HZRjE08c7bnWUYsxeTESisT4WDLbGi+7yKEHUfCtVz4nHL2LrUvgkEPxU30v/oM1Ong1sp1gN4ElP/qyeoVoCmnOHs2KTTWyOxajTaBNCbnLiUkn2u/m1ortUvu6GxouwR0jXE8v2BVAoPQmQ9P/6VOcHeBE6obZF8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789721783; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fn48125rKcPC3pOW5NKUmZ9FAgGxT8YpuG96UZBY/dM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cFX+kwhM3/7CitvKb8UJ5LROBC+/C+zd0VBe4BpCyKyx7oQ53jTqJcmRbUJ02dHGQMu1rbd+PpmvGAz5PjiWY9dGyE/2VgaUtgrmO8ZcvQZ7Zm42e83swE2IdytiIS/7CJKmnyjQohnMev0Wb/eloD8Q+dh9lD8IjPXRf0D62ws= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=netfilter.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=netfilter.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b=KJq2/or0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.190.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=netfilter.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=netfilter.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b="KJq2/or0" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1789721778; bh=fn48125rKcPC3pOW5NKUmZ9FAgGxT8YpuG96UZBY/dM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=KJq2/or0mWc0PhnolRAlSowcb5WkQlPCfyIbcgsCPdFNAL/NMj4qj57H5wTBmiPgs ruJPVnsBiNrl4FhuYQ3tSqkUvyft5avsdSnk4avmkRfRjRj68JrfnnGt12H9ah+PN9 JNUtiR2e5HZsLB4nJKCFhdlDm9WyZM5s+GBMzjM9Kf/HbI8nZespKf/PelWchIuvLn p9bg655I9pn+oA3qXPqTy/+zhyjgrZNERtQUDZohSZ9F3hxjTWFjohGcnAD1SMTilb RdUg+Y/AC0BzHIr+yqH2szhRiuyAF4rybYR48xXg9HXSggY7Kt/agMfmWm4H5ynvt4 1Jkn9qKNitVnQ== Received: from netfilter.org (mail-agni [217.70.190.124]) by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id 4F2D460052; Fri, 18 Sep 2026 10:56:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 10:56:15 +0200 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org, fw@strlen.de, ja@ssi.bg Subject: my summary of LLM judgement in this PR [was Re: [PATCH net 01/10] netfilter: flowtable: publish HW_DEAD after worker is done] Message-ID: References: <20260916231652.127456-2-pablo@netfilter.org> <20260918020406.3513303-1-kuba@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=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Jakub, I will be posting a v2 of this PR in a few minutes. LLM found one real issue in the last, it also refer to two pre-existing issues that I can address. One of the reported pre-existing issues in nfnetlink_queue, Florian hesitates if it is theoretical. Julian also wants to send a v2 for its IPVS patch to ... write a better commit description to please the LLM, it seems. In summary, one real issue in this PR I would say, which is my fault because I misguided the patch submitter. I'm sure these tools can help us get things better, I understand too we have to try them all so we can evaluate. But I'm starting to wonder if it is worth stalling the pipeline and retrigger a PR continuosly, when we can follow up for those that we deem to be addressed. Thanks.