On Fri, Dec 5, 2025 at 2:36 AM Przemek Kitszel <[email protected]> wrote: > thank you again for the report, and thank you for the fix, it looks good > just some little nitpicks from me:
Thank you for the response, I'll get working on the feedback right away. > 1. this is a bugfix, so you should add a Fixes: tag with the commit that > added the regression (I remember you have a "slow to rebuild" platform, > so just let me know how far you have reached with bisection/looking for > the root cause) We recently moved the e810 NICs we have onto a server with a much larger CPU so compilation time is no longer a concern. I believe the regression was introduced in b66a972. So I'm currently in the process of bisecting to verify my assumption. Just running into an issue with building the 5.12 kernel. I'll be reaching out to the kernel newbies mailing list for some advice on handling the compilation issues. > 2. bugfixes should have [PATCH iwl-net] in the Subject > 3. you should CC netdev mailing list on IWL submissions too: > [email protected] Acking these two pieces of feedback, I'll add them. > nit: you could simply "return 0" here > then the status variable initialization during declaration could be > removed > > yet another thing: for new code I would name such variable "err" Acking these two pieces of feedback, I'll update the code accordingly. Thank you for your time Cody
