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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5504C43381 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D09F20850 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727237AbfCTRQa (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2019 13:16:30 -0400 Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:33898 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726529AbfCTRQ3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2019 13:16:29 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F2A20184; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:27 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I9kNGSrCEPPJ; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-essen-01.secunet.de (mail-essen-01.secunet.de [10.53.40.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B86D6200A7; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from gauss2.secunet.de (10.182.7.193) by mail-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:22 +0100 Received: by gauss2.secunet.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 03272318050E; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:23 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:16:22 +0100 From: Steffen Klassert To: "Su Yanjun " CC: Eric Dumazet , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net: xfrm: Add '_rcu' tag for rcu protected pointer in netns_xfrm Message-ID: <20190320171622.GA6035@gauss3.secunet.de> References: <1551923648-17656-1-git-send-email-suyj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20190311101006.GK3758@gauss3.secunet.de> <20190319151503.GW6035@gauss3.secunet.de> <91cf303a-7d44-2c15-8b7a-8b2eb797a234@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <91cf303a-7d44-2c15-8b7a-8b2eb797a234@cn.fujitsu.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-State: 0 X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Error: 0 X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Sender: 23 X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Server: d65e63f7-5c15-413f-8f63-c0d707471c93 X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 2c86f778-e09b-4440-8b15-867914633a10 X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Guid: 181D3464-E827-464D-B547-5AEC87B90C9B X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-ProcessedOnRouted: True Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:53:54AM +0800, Su Yanjun wrote: > > Firs of all, I didn't produce it on my test machine. First of all, you should provide better quality patches. All of your recent patches had issues, some were sorted out before applying other not. Bugs happen, but it is not acceptable that all your patches are buggy. I've reverted this patch like Eric suggested.