Re: [PATCH net-next v8 06/12] gve: simplify reset logic

[Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>]

On 9/25/26 20:56, netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 7 potential
> issue(s) to consider.
> 
> Critical: 0 · High: 2 (1) · Medium: 2 (2) · Low: 3 (1)
> 
> If you believe none of the issues are legitimate, please reply to each
> issue of Medium severity or higher and explain why the AI is wrong.
> If any of them are legitimate and you plan to respin, please let patchwork
> know by including "pw-bot: cr" as a separate line at the end of your reply
> (one such reply per series is enough).
> 
> - [High] After a failed recovery, an unprivileged user can crash the
>    kernel with an ethtool query.
> - [High] When gve_recover() fails during a reset while the interface is
>    up (service-task reset, ethtool reset, flow-rule timeout, or…
> - [Medium] gve_teardown_control_plane_resources() (gve_main.c) now calls
>    gve_teardown_clock().
> - [Medium] The commit message does not mention several user-visible
>    changes to error handling, and one of its design statements is not…
> - [Low] This patch removed gve_queues_mem_remove() from
>    gve_queues_start()'s error path.
> - [Low] The commit fixes a real unbounded recursive reset but has no
>    Fixes: tag.
> - [Low] Item 2 of the commit message describes the old bug this way:
>    gve_close() during gve_shutdown triggers a hardware reset and then…
Low prio remarks could be ignored and we prefer no fixes tag in net-next
patches, but the first 3 ones in the list look relevant and should be
addressed.

Also please note you are supposed to address clashiko comments proactively.

/P