From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server-vie001.gnuweeb.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Authentication-Results: server-vie001.gnuweeb.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=O4susQSG; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A99AC3127C01; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 22:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: server-vie001.gnuweeb.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.218.47; helo=mail-ej1-f47.google.com; envelope-from=torvalds@linuxfoundation.org; receiver= Received: from mail-ej1-f47.google.com (mail-ej1-f47.google.com [209.85.218.47]) by server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17DAB3127BF9 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 22:40:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f47.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-af9611d8ff7so66272166b.1 for ; Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:40:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; t=1754433656; x=1755038456; darn=vger.gnuweeb.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=X3m+xXB2nDYY2FTeCIps+Dx8G8ytYsYqX18zczPNIoE=; b=O4susQSGTYUWMnij3npBHM0ggd/XHsyx3SYPYWW90SqFKXZB4prAQUbOMrhc9l2FZ7 8sgIbCBGNF7mq/NrpDB5+IJ2p7n38MuYy+9AflbBcFJHovQwFK3AtET+Zum6mKUvFsCf Ot56khzBk3UTXKOp21Bb+j27vwgr5B1PWV/Nc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1754433656; x=1755038456; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=X3m+xXB2nDYY2FTeCIps+Dx8G8ytYsYqX18zczPNIoE=; b=GdEp332wLUPvG2315KEO0lcrktSNYh+n4GHqHjat0/REyOeYQ5AfHsMwjz1G8ImVZ7 znWtJSslU68oIaBinufMjS/C94BeJ/OcCYXu6lVooA2+Eefk2Exja0YMjNu1r8YUW89r kSz46oU8PCyu9bBYKSCQboBFvIXRtIG2DTs4Foj+Gn8wQndF3rwawkAQeYsO0oYp7JIT rTlU16t5mSni4sPbwPlcgy9hibQQAzfdg2T4HdCaBV7f9T61v0N2cEJ6aiEqiBpkGT3U Lz/a5YFnxfZJn0JEGl8O+UH5A250K10fwG4YpgwWaDnttT147gjc/ls+nzsDQ8YMIZq3 GB+Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWNBkn5aCl6HiHxIElR4VtqZJhfktH58NVNaMdANQJKx7bBnCBDkt3PYMfybahB/WoLCt2v@vger.gnuweeb.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz2NFA321r4yubKKGFO7Aff8SbXxO7FD4Awf48beLLXQFkUpgy+ 3nYMlHHa1cjqokr3p5+M3bQ460NyVDvJPh2TwJxfLMxys8D9fF9PW+5yoH0ryItJ/ydE3NCfsEM UV69hMg5DVQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctS8OleZcOtOulovPFv1kOKNUmhfoOYm/1QQoyAjkYPYpLWMd9zxxvZweYqcdY G2SfT8QulOXyOEBIr597e/XoCgfQ1zwn5XJzr8sv/c7aHEz5EkbCYh1dRfcle4mCn/qDGp74h/8 fjq2cy/TstVLfbm4aiMYXWnZ/dBpnX0uRWZwqeSzsXXRb8kXtOPZGSZR8JlrYWYfRja+elgQq96 Cd0D19sZ1F9togHEtLaplO/jz/2x3WvQ8LrmlQlwZQmdod6R5KGuprAzOIhccnC3bPaFSBUAwPq OZQ20mOgt3XwNe3Obcrx/C1oCSUoqXzECRD+84Cnpsss9p0xs6aKVW2oRpNoYtr8tTNT2jPPJ8G cPTJZnbHPHowZBYnC8s5foJTM99xu8W9+CcqA21BFriS+s06cpJ3MOvsKLwHclQE4IekgKRv0yy vz1ZMIHJvCymMOiL+k5Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFt0Key29vTq6vdsWJa9kVsQMB1fVEma+HeKU+ndgaGECMI3SiWguUs2zxuRlrHEGY0+y767Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7316:b0:af9:8739:10ca with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-af99099f240mr52826566b.28.1754433656048; Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-f50.google.com (mail-ed1-f50.google.com. [209.85.208.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-af91a1e6cecsm984755066b.70.2025.08.05.15.40.53 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-61580eb7995so795396a12.0 for ; Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:40:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW6z6Mr4iV3RyXpWL1ygUn93Esw2UlMlqXPVjM+H7MGgsLKjfF8LNNCHJ7GH7mx5SylXDhd@vger.gnuweeb.org X-Received: by 2002:a50:d6da:0:b0:615:1ffe:7e13 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-61796e84ddamr347112a12.16.1754433653535; Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:40:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250801190310.58443-1-ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org> <20250804100050.GQ8494@horms.kernel.org> <20250805202848.GC61519@horms.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250805202848.GC61519@horms.kernel.org> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 01:40:37 +0300 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: X-Gm-Features: Ac12FXzn6xC3GEWZwV8GpsWb-o1g1X9WA5sVZ0frXqURB1sH9fEGM06GbVjXWic Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: usbnet: Fix the wrong netif_carrier_on() call placement To: Simon Horman Cc: Ammar Faizi , Oliver Neukum , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Netdev Mailing List , Linux USB Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Armando Budianto , gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, John Ernberg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: On Tue, 5 Aug 2025 at 23:28, Simon Horman wrote: > > I have looked over the patch and it appears to me that it addresses a > straightforward logic error: a check was added to turn the carrier on only > if it is already on. Which seems a bit nonsensical. And presumably the > intention was to add the check for the opposite case. > > This patch addresses that problem. So I agree that there was a logic error. I'm not 100% sure about the "straightforward" part. In particular, the whole *rest* of the code in that if (!netif_carrier_ok(dev->net)) { no longer makes sense after we've turned the link on with that if (test_and_clear_bit(EVENT_LINK_CARRIER_ON, &dev->flags)) netif_carrier_on(dev->net); sequence. Put another way - once we've turned the carrier on, now that whole /* kill URBs for reading packets to save bus bandwidth */ unlink_urbs(dev, &dev->rxq); /* * tx_timeout will unlink URBs for sending packets and * tx queue is stopped by netcore after link becomes off */ thing makes no sense. So my gut feel is that the if (test_and_clear_bit(EVENT_LINK_CARRIER_ON, &dev->flags)) netif_carrier_on(dev->net); should actually be done outside that if-statement entirely, because it literally ends up changing the thing that if-statement is testing. And no, I didn't actually test that version, because I was hoping that somebody who actually knows this code better would pipe up. Linus