On 9/29/26 01:34, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
Wang Zhan wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 04:45:18 +0000 [email protected] wrote:
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.
Only 1/5 carries a Fixes tag; the rest is new feature work. 1/5 was found
by code inspection while writing the resegmentation path, and it is covered
by the KUnit case gso_test_tcp_limit_l3_proto() in 5/5, which fails on the
unpatched tree: a tagged IPv6 frame is measured against the IPv4 limit and
segmented although the device could send it as one TSO frame, no crash.
If 1/5 fixes a bug that is reachable today (does it?) then it needs to
go to net on its own.
FTR I don't think patch 1/5 is stable material: I would keep it in this
series stripping the fixes tag.
/P
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
