These are some of the issues that LLM reported to netconsole, and they
are being addressed here before big refactors.

I was doing some big refactors, and got some "pre-existent-issues"
during LLM review of the refactor, that make them hard to guarantee that
refactor is not introducing any bug, so, let's clean these pre-existent
bugs first, and then submit the refactor.

The issues fixed in this patchset were reported during the review of
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260524-netconsole_move_more-v1-0-909d1ab398b4@debian.org/

Not all of them got fixed, but, those that were easy to reason about.

Why net-next and not 'net' tree.

Most of the functions that are being fixed here moved from netpoll to
netconsole, thus, fixing this on net will cause merge conflicts from
'net' to 'net-next', thus I decided to fix it on 'net-next', given we
are on 7.1-rc6 already. Sorry if that is not the right approach.

Changed from v1:
  * Change it from 'net' to 'net-next'.

---
Breno Leitao (3):
      netconsole: do not schedule skb pool refill from NMI
      netconsole: do not dequeue pooled skbs that cannot satisfy len
      netconsole: take target_cleanup_list_lock in drop_netconsole_target()

 drivers/net/netconsole.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 include/linux/netpoll.h  | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 net/core/netpoll.c       |  7 -------
 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 08484c504b55a98bd100527fbe10a3caf55ff3ff
change-id: 20260528-netcons_fix_before_move-cd6cfec4e8f5

Best regards,
-- 
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>

On Tue, Jun 02, 2026 at 07:26:56AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> These are some of the issues that LLM reported to netconsole, and they
> are being addressed here before big refactors.
> 
> I was doing some big refactors, and got some "pre-existent-issues"
> during LLM review of the refactor, that make them hard to guarantee that
> refactor is not introducing any bug, so, let's clean these pre-existent
> bugs first, and then submit the refactor.
> 
> The issues fixed in this patchset were reported during the review of
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260524-netconsole_move_more-v1-0-909d1ab398b4@debian.org/
> 
> Not all of them got fixed, but, those that were easy to reason about.
> 
> Why net-next and not 'net' tree.
> 
> Most of the functions that are being fixed here moved from netpoll to
> netconsole, thus, fixing this on net will cause merge conflicts from
> 'net' to 'net-next', thus I decided to fix it on 'net-next', given we
> are on 7.1-rc6 already. Sorry if that is not the right approach.
> 
> Changed from v1:
>   * Change it from 'net' to 'net-next'.

Hi Breno,

There is AI-generated review of this patch-set available on both
https://sashiko.dev and https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/

I would appreciate it if you could look over that with a view
to addressing any issues that directly effect this patch-set.

On Thu, Jun 04, 2026 at 02:06:22PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2026 at 07:26:56AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > These are some of the issues that LLM reported to netconsole, and they
> > are being addressed here before big refactors.
> >
> > I was doing some big refactors, and got some "pre-existent-issues"
> > during LLM review of the refactor, that make them hard to guarantee that
> > refactor is not introducing any bug, so, let's clean these pre-existent
> > bugs first, and then submit the refactor.
> >
> > The issues fixed in this patchset were reported during the review of
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260524-netconsole_move_more-v1-0-909d1ab398b4@debian.org/
> >
> > Not all of them got fixed, but, those that were easy to reason about.
> >
> > Why net-next and not 'net' tree.
> >
> > Most of the functions that are being fixed here moved from netpoll to
> > netconsole, thus, fixing this on net will cause merge conflicts from
> > 'net' to 'net-next', thus I decided to fix it on 'net-next', given we
> > are on 7.1-rc6 already. Sorry if that is not the right approach.
> >
> > Changed from v1:
> >   * Change it from 'net' to 'net-next'.
>
> Hi Breno,
>
> There is AI-generated review of this patch-set available on both
> https://sashiko.dev and https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/
>
> I would appreciate it if you could look over that with a view
> to addressing any issues that directly effect this patch-set.

Ack. While most of the reported issues are pre-existing are being fixed,
there is one genuine regression: invoking WARN_ON_ONCE() in a potential
NMI context is problematic since it may trigger panic_on_warn.

I will send a revised version.

Thanks,
--breno

--
pw-bot: cr