Re: [PATCH 0/3] gve: Fixes and clean-up

[Jeroen de Borst]

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:42 AM Christophe JAILLET
<christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Le 01/07/2021 à 18:20, Jeroen de Borst a écrit :
> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:58 PM Christophe JAILLET
> > <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> This serie is part of the effort to axe the wrappers in
> >> include/linux/pci-dma-compat.h
> >>
> >> While looking at it, I spotted:
> >>    - a resource leak in an error handling path (patch 1)
> >>    - an error code that could be propagated. (patch 2)
> >>      This patch could be ignored. It's only goal is to be more consistent
> >>      with other drivers.
> >>
> >> These 2 paches are not related to the 'pci-dma-compat.h' stuff, which can
> >> be found in patch 3.
> >>
> >> Christophe JAILLET (3):
> >>    gve: Fix an error handling path in 'gve_probe()'
> >>    gve: Propagate error codes to caller
> >>    gve: Simplify code and axe the use of a deprecated API
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for these patches.
> >
> > Can split this into 2 patch series;
>
> Sure.
>
> > one for net (with the first 2
> > patches) and one for net-next (with the cleanup one)?
>
> I've never worked with net and net-next directly.
> If just adding net and net-next after [PATCH] in the subject of the
> mail, yes, I can do it if it helps.
>
>
> BTW, I gave a look at https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
> The patch 1/3 is marked as failed because "1 blamed authors not CCed:
> lrizzo@xxxxxxxxxx; 1 maintainers not CCed: lrizzo@xxxxxxxxxx"
>
> This author/blame was not spotted by get_maintainer.pl. Is it something
> I should worry about?
>
>
> > Also the label in the first patch should probably read
> > 'abort_with_gve_init' instead of 'abort_with_vge_init'.
>
> Good catch. Sorry about that.
>
> >
> > Jeroen
> >
>
> CJ
>

[again, now in plaintext, sorry for the spam]

You tag the patch sets with [PATCH net <n>/2] for the 2 fixes and just
[PATCH net-next] for the cleanup one.

You can cc Luigi (lrizzo@xxxxxxxxxx) on that one patch for
completeness, but I think it shouldn't be necessary.

Thanks!