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 5CB1331355C; Mon, 5 Oct 2026 14:00:51 +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=1791208855; cv=none; b=LO6Q8OlFyDYQ5z8+MB+ZnVX7RrmO+3Lyfh4GTeftWnAzXgnC6FXotcs2/JFZbVBkh+P6fCK35r0ECVZ1qa5DBkoUHIUqVprsH7Eg/iNYloh3Le/3mTvuV1FfPA9VKuVatTLR56JQM2ZENVaLg2OSbK/NbDJLrvOndiSZX3y5l98= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791208855; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RIuMMFcZLY9wzddjkZV5cSo6aph28YmRGJhH7GDAT+s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qL9euO6MNUsE3DbtMurybRNticGQZ/2OOi/2F6z4GXoUL99hyQj7WqYH5exiI9o2s2bxwgmD6zEgY75fs+rBGxgoVlaPkBVUXNgaqZFtgY7u5C1P85Wgmik/t18AYC/BhU/lN016H45chvX6J3Ld9H8dfg39C6d1JtqAE4H8XBE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=YAAmNTKP; 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="YAAmNTKP" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 126B11F000FF; Mon, 5 Oct 2026 14:00:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1791208849; bh=NK8IgM6qDsaqMaelGby/WPyf/ApioUZd84f15x8UU2g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=YAAmNTKPeUqS+aurOI43UPNDp8ghqvtzPtAY8vUUhiqQcwyeeKdvAs0jWk2Y9mTDp g4bGUlphDEb17ceOpOJ/1HqHA6R12ZtlGXDuKyQoTU8AwbQjSsIYZ9VpLduzUItvf8 6m5rmggtJ3ptUjVuPJjpsjW/7CrRDge40qU6aJ2WYaHHWrGR3jhVjDfCJLtI2BlNQb aMku9dARmTHhJQkC274PFN047XekwQTMP63VleT2eqmsjtWAozf4OsY2y3D5gDu7HM ZA/lL2GT4r1OrVHL5bCbmyI69kVLRHH67HvTjXvfWf32GJyUPzd6gQCMSE1ziM1krp NESXC2AaN55Bg== Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2026 10:00:46 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org Cc: "Miguel Gazquez (Schneider Electric)" , stable@vger.kernel.org, Jamal Hadi Salim , Cong Wang , Jiri Pirko , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , "Samudrala, Sridhar" , John Fastabend , Benjamin Robin , Thomas Petazzoni , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Victor Nogueira , Pedro Tammela , Simon Horman Subject: netdev LLM review for backports (WAS: [PATCH 5.10.y] net: sched: cls_u32: Undo tcf_bind_filter if u32_replace_hw_knode) Message-ID: References: <20261005-cve-2023-53733-v1-1-d716b944802c@bootlin.com> <179119639380.1402591.2155637888002963@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <179119639380.1402591.2155637888002963@kernel.org> On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 10:33:13AM +0000, netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org wrote: >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. Hello, I started seeing these reviews on proposed backports of net/ commits, and while they are REALLY great for upstream commits, I do not think that these comments make sense in the context of a backport. -- Thanks, Sasha