> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Greg
> KH
> Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2024 4:13 PM
> To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx>
> Cc: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx>; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; LKML <linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Gui-Dong Han <hanguidong02@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Jia-Ju
> Bai <baijiaju1990@xxxxxxxxx>; intel-wired-lan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Simon Horman
> <horms@xxxxxxxxxx>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw <przemyslaw.kitszel@xxxxxxxxx>;
> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>; David S.
> Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] ice: Fix improper handling of refcount in
> ice_sriov_set_msix_vec_count()
>
> On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 02:40:10PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > …
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_sriov.c
> > > @@ -1096,8 +1096,10 @@ int ice_sriov_set_msix_vec_count(struct pci_dev
> *vf_dev, int msix_vec_count)
> > > return -ENOENT;
> > >
> > > vsi = ice_get_vf_vsi(vf);
> > > - if (!vsi)
> > > + if (!vsi) {
> > > + ice_put_vf(vf);
> > > return -ENOENT;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > prev_msix = vf->num_msix;
> > > prev_queues = vf->num_vf_qs;
> > > @@ -1142,8 +1144,10 @@ int ice_sriov_set_msix_vec_count(struct pci_dev
> *vf_dev, int msix_vec_count)
> > > vf->num_msix = prev_msix;
> > > vf->num_vf_qs = prev_queues;
> > > vf->first_vector_idx = ice_sriov_get_irqs(pf, vf->num_msix);
> > > - if (vf->first_vector_idx < 0)
> > > + if (vf->first_vector_idx < 0) {
> > > + ice_put_vf(vf);
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > if (needs_rebuild) {
> > > ice_vf_reconfig_vsi(vf);
> >
> > Would you like to collaborate with any goto chains according to the
> > desired completion of exception handling?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Markus
> >
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.
>
> Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless review
> comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing list. I
> strongly suggest that you not do this anymore. Please do not bother developers
> who are actively working to produce patches and features with comments that, in
> the end, are a waste of time.
>
> Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to follow it
> at all. The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by almost all Linux kernel
> maintainers for having a persistent pattern of behavior of producing distracting
> and pointless commentary, and inability to adapt to feedback. Please feel free to
> also ignore emails from them.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h's patch email bot
Tested-by: Rafal Romanowski <rafal.romanowski@xxxxxxxxx>
