From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 4A1D943DEBE; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 05:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790833149; cv=none; b=F+22Jwgoz2t6c6VDPh2Pp1y/+lpqLe8eONkLeSC5XRuyFE8D1M7JCZHjuyXVim4fg7wSuTG6CVwugxzQ8amnYiucmO1VeG9M1798HJnCZm+X2KYE68YCVOCDPrxKD++arOcPJ45XdBLvWpHq6GvqscsIX1kzgGDTcUdCtP2FVWg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790833149; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gp7PRv3WjAiMJrp0DvXpRvTv3mwC8R3NiezXzUE7FxE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=GNkEBcn0VJLapeqslUbU6XABWedLRa1lVDf7PQgnnU1vOYrHE1YqwO2lZBKWT18yVj/f/M3ocyg4RIh+X57b1eqQUeMfT623Lr5v7bYzXtZM5D95Ec0O0E7IJvwqQFBCp42JuuDSNwY1nTn3P7u1QyBPemkWRRGNTa1lNY5b0B0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=B/SdpxBx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="B/SdpxBx" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB9F71F000FF; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 05:39:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790833145; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=B/SdpxBx+sXCbLm2ir0RdmyuGV91/wsTGD1L7tzg5bP47cZFKLen8tFsBV9HDsjkr I9Vrxzc898KkiquEemsDMyMBEjChQ3fSFvQAZT2WQBq5hSFjBERaId/4QsG65sGeAX AcxCOVo6Id6ERBKrR4u/Q4sRFE/yT5rzBZ0UtoRMoe136/cBLg1cIssIVKPG2qHvXC BW8CWH1/GNAXnQzD8D/EI0CzrTImJjqT8DEQkk4Tw9zSPTdPgJ5k/vOCYa0p7NsFaZ WsjeHkMfyotE/zAWD5WwR69JMxbcdeItHlGEHwMObn6jcT3qB+oQKMXEuyd538bBKf ThS/1EkhJHU7w== From: netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org To: James Hilliard Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni , Jakub Kicinski , Richard Cochran , Andrew Lunn , Yangbo Lu , Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ptp: vclock: reject failed physical clock samples Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2026 05:39:04 +0000 Message-ID: <179083314427.31693.1407407420445848454@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260930-ptp-vclock-sampling-v1-1-c11bc16691ae@gmail.com> References: <20260930-ptp-vclock-sampling-v1-1-c11bc16691ae@gmail.com> Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Hi! This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its commit messages seem to be missing some information: - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static analysis tool scan. - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages. Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead, reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages then. The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think that is the case please reply and explain.