Fixing sparse error in xdp run code by introducing new variable xdp_res
instead of overloading this into the skb pointer as i40e drivers done
in commit 12738ac4754e ("i40e: Fix sparse errors in i40e_txrx.c") and
commit ae4393dfd472 ("i40e: fix broken XDP support").

v3: Fix uninitialized 'xdp_res' in patch 3 and 4 which Reported-by
    kernel test robot
v2: Fix this as i40e drivers done instead of return NULL in xdp run code

Yue Haibing (4):
  igc: Fix passing 0 to ERR_PTR in igc_xdp_run_prog()
  igb: Fix passing 0 to ERR_PTR in igb_run_xdp()
  ixgbe: Fix passing 0 to ERR_PTR in ixgbe_run_xdp()
  ixgbevf: Fix passing 0 to ERR_PTR in ixgbevf_run_xdp()

 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c     | 22 +++++++-----------
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c     | 20 ++++++----------
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 23 ++++++++-----------
 .../net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c | 23 ++++++++-----------
 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:56:19PM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
> Fixing sparse error in xdp run code by introducing new variable xdp_res
> instead of overloading this into the skb pointer as i40e drivers done
> in commit 12738ac4754e ("i40e: Fix sparse errors in i40e_txrx.c") and
> commit ae4393dfd472 ("i40e: fix broken XDP support").
> 
> v3: Fix uninitialized 'xdp_res' in patch 3 and 4 which Reported-by
>     kernel test robot
> v2: Fix this as i40e drivers done instead of return NULL in xdp run code

Hi Yue Haibing, all,

I like these changes a lot. But I do wonder if it would
be more appropriate to target them at net-next (or iwl-next)
rather than net, without Fixes tags. This is because they
don't seem to be fixing (user-visible) bugs. Am I missing something?

...

On 10/22/2024 12:32 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:56:19PM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
>> Fixing sparse error in xdp run code by introducing new variable xdp_res
>> instead of overloading this into the skb pointer as i40e drivers done
>> in commit 12738ac4754e ("i40e: Fix sparse errors in i40e_txrx.c") and
>> commit ae4393dfd472 ("i40e: fix broken XDP support").
>>
>> v3: Fix uninitialized 'xdp_res' in patch 3 and 4 which Reported-by
>>     kernel test robot
>> v2: Fix this as i40e drivers done instead of return NULL in xdp run code
> 
> Hi Yue Haibing, all,
> 
> I like these changes a lot. But I do wonder if it would
> be more appropriate to target them at net-next (or iwl-next)
> rather than net, without Fixes tags. This is because they
> don't seem to be fixing (user-visible) bugs. Am I missing something?
> 
> ...

Yea, these do seem like next candidates.

On 2024/10/23 3:17, Jacob Keller wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/22/2024 12:32 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:56:19PM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
>>> Fixing sparse error in xdp run code by introducing new variable xdp_res
>>> instead of overloading this into the skb pointer as i40e drivers done
>>> in commit 12738ac4754e ("i40e: Fix sparse errors in i40e_txrx.c") and
>>> commit ae4393dfd472 ("i40e: fix broken XDP support").
>>>
>>> v3: Fix uninitialized 'xdp_res' in patch 3 and 4 which Reported-by
>>>     kernel test robot
>>> v2: Fix this as i40e drivers done instead of return NULL in xdp run code
>>
>> Hi Yue Haibing, all,
>>
>> I like these changes a lot. But I do wonder if it would
>> be more appropriate to target them at net-next (or iwl-next)
>> rather than net, without Fixes tags. This is because they
>> don't seem to be fixing (user-visible) bugs. Am I missing something?
>>
>> ...
> 
> Yea, these do seem like next candidates.

Should I resend this serial target to iwl-next?
> 
> .

On 10/25/24 05:30, Yue Haibing wrote:
> On 2024/10/23 3:17, Jacob Keller wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/22/2024 12:32 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:56:19PM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
>>>> Fixing sparse error in xdp run code by introducing new variable xdp_res
>>>> instead of overloading this into the skb pointer as i40e drivers done
>>>> in commit 12738ac4754e ("i40e: Fix sparse errors in i40e_txrx.c") and
>>>> commit ae4393dfd472 ("i40e: fix broken XDP support").
>>>>
>>>> v3: Fix uninitialized 'xdp_res' in patch 3 and 4 which Reported-by
>>>>      kernel test robot
>>>> v2: Fix this as i40e drivers done instead of return NULL in xdp run code
>>>
>>> Hi Yue Haibing, all,
>>>
>>> I like these changes a lot. But I do wonder if it would
>>> be more appropriate to target them at net-next (or iwl-next)
>>> rather than net, without Fixes tags. This is because they
>>> don't seem to be fixing (user-visible) bugs. Am I missing something?
>>>
>>> ...
>>
>> Yea, these do seem like next candidates.
> 
> Should I resend this serial target to iwl-next?
yes, please
(please also link to v3 from v4)