From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout.web.de (mout.web.de [212.227.15.3]) (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 7FC92146A93; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 19:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.227.15.3 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719345062; cv=none; b=qRJVUdFEp1gdr12wz7ovrDe5itmhh6l2YTIcmDFa5h3Yo6W9sZ9xkFOt4hxJk2zANXddU7eybDbEvcEQMoy/GRbtZzdRnKodAZ4bF2FWOoWIeMddqGRrA+jQslY6uVBQb6YFxeu/72ylep+aXCF614DV89zUyyqKcYZ5IQNJtmI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719345062; c=relaxed/simple; bh=q61SoAdox/WBBhi8gn9DCoq2ivzhK0IMMq8W3Jhug4k=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Ab/HnTOdElvx5r+6T0YsRURcScFApsmFKMC3H2BlW9syn4ncs/UYSr6TG8esLaJIwGwuZ9G15a06QfHE7bM774a8sCODmgHJQftXdefJ9ZP4CksRVsc7mpG/0ZgjMVQZpBGbFhMXr53LO+oUud16Nt2GgUOB5oLoyRXzw02AaC4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=web.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=web.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=web.de header.i=markus.elfring@web.de header.b=rKucC3el; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.227.15.3 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=web.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=web.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=web.de header.i=markus.elfring@web.de header.b="rKucC3el" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1719345035; x=1719949835; i=markus.elfring@web.de; bh=KcJwEYMmFuTXnPbYkFDyuXTVqSseTQFqloyrkEmiI6I=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc: References:From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=rKucC3elPTnFm33WhFmEvn77UdN2AdhtvKJ/QSTSf+OsE8BGiOexImvt3c22h6TI +c6frwvGTp3BYZQJAFQTy3vDIfl39aYcxzMRF6A06MblBeD660Jd8p7XCM338atco wCZF5ZCojaWfbKmpp05t1tO5qWSPf6TWS3V0zsQUhvQWTUIVnPstm1P5R8VqWE1KZ aJ7Z6hI5YfwBD40CFrwtzgT0dt5/6CEwvE89Px53rnF/T+ng0M6NCAx28VtZ5cbBY ayqKrNSLlDjmYRF3cNjZ7ZYV+uG6fy3wL6Nm3+dTLw+CwE2tC9FSvmEnCAsjzsskD hierygOKjsFwXKhSOw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from [192.168.178.21] ([94.31.85.95]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb005 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mav6t-1ssUfA1PwZ-00iCyu; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 21:50:35 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 21:50:33 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [net PATCH v2 0/7] octeontx2-af: Fix klockwork issues in AF driver To: Suman Ghosh , netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: LKML , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Jerin Jacob , Eric Dumazet , Geethasowjanya Akula , Hariprasad Kelam , Linu Cherian , Paolo Abeni , Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta , Sunil Kovvuri Goutham References: <20240625173350.1181194-1-sumang@marvell.com> <8fd713c2-5b85-4223-8a06-f2cedc2a1fb8@web.de> Content-Language: en-GB From: Markus Elfring In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:GE+CfSs9XOZOEKhKPKItjAxMU1YqSmDmV73dAO3WNcpIb+msumA HB9eLZ1/qRE1GRMuB/2cb9/lkBTx21yVC9wJ0fubxaqpEEjx/rtCxNdteybelAeerQvaLZY 0XQji1v+inv2MF6cDtI6vkK5ZyKj8S3aP36PKssc3StNPAofLP2L54YA27O2smLE1+IKbQj QB71lTvUafbidldjaYsoQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:8K86JjzKEYA=;hjqg9zQBQB/0YIEKCocP9JVCGAb a0Pmlxui+B44I+Fpmzx9+VWv4xUi34CThsb17ByT9II5ASayUBtJYSWGP0lakI/ASabcf1rvR QBs/dOdXYmx/LuwywWf0pwe0+q0/uW8ZwLKmVBe3+hVWoxc2jr1yrOd7psir/bQSfA/0Xaqy+ 4xTyGfoB5vr7MVvi9wuFQ9NQmfMri+x8zdyhpglBh9/NpJIs/f6ruryqlDrYXmfw18t3RgXia GxbbuaiCU9g7tUbFSy4M1F0qdwB+xz47qsZvbHsnerLazcD8dLnOulFGfChO42IN3qRu9v6DK rLqX9IXRIY2cV+vI6P8JRCpFMAdDKS2KYaRba86BZKb8jBvO9utS2UsEeQJ1oAulyQcn8S4na yXz6yHySadXT9gk9U8/iDXLMQZ2PfkdXbNbTGwWVbOiWn9xhYVNHwqxTFCH/Xqw8fm5LeFzkz IbvUIMAX9IKZjA+E0qos4LY6uf4Rh3SHbplNAkSGlEn9Wol14PKSgEaEEM7X4r+hou+h6NxEv jKzqFt3eNGDKIuHZ5CHiWV/FkwR/ox458WuLJ+iDbSDqaUg9CsuwSsICp4ZCTx/QYk6Pk88rg PndbA5hTn53Dw2BPoJv9ohKJPV/AcG2qjiIExuAgf5b+wOtPjDd5O7s7+cnWSxaGEQookHxvX 9xUy6fVqbMxXVQ/HENyf86NAqn6F4Iaga8lp9BET12x6IZSZnqOoeGELV2aAk7ytsqx0iclxH mbteoDgW1XwyXryi07o/vuMRH241/pl6YFldMERXIKJze/x4GgEaDLTKama99sxRdIFsAqieh AyE7fVuKKFpzDRmnl28SAfVkXOT1c4aAKf9hw0+qZfkEY= > > * Why did you not directly respond to the recurring patch review conce= rn > > =C2=A0 about better summary phrases (or message subjects)? =E2=80=A6 > [Suman] I thought the =E2=80=9Csummery phrase=E2=80=9D is per patch. Summaries are obviously important parts for patch subjects. > The cover letter is mentioning the reason for the change I would like to read an improved overview for your change approach. > and each patch set is adding the summery for the change. I have got understanding difficulties for such information somehow. > Since it is not some actual =E2=80=98fix=E2=80=99 I am not sure what mor= e to add other It seems that there is a temporary conflict according to expected explanat= ion quality. > than mentioning klockwork fixes. Source code analysis tools can provide more helpful information. Do I need to remind you for the published software documentation around =E2=80=9CC checkers=E2=80=9D? > I am not sure what more can be added for a variable initialization to ze= ro > or adding a NULL check. * Common vulnerability enumeration? * CERT reference? > Can you suggest some? * Please take another look at linked information sources. * Can you get sufficient inspirations from published patches? > > * Would you like to explain any more here which development concern ca= tegories > > =C2=A0 were picked up from the mentioned source code analysis tool? > > [Suman] =C2=A0Development concerns are mentioned in individual patch set= s. * Grouping? * Outlines? * Taxonomy? > > * How much do you care for the grouping of logical changes into > > =C2=A0 consistent patch series? > > [Suman] I thought about it but then I was not sure > how to add fix tags for a unified patch set. Why did you not ask before sending another questionable patch series? > Hence went with per file approach. It can occasionally be helpful for change preparations. > Do you see any problem with the approach? Obviously, yes. I hope that you can take several patch review issues better into account f= inally. Regards, Markus