On Mon, 2020-06-08 at 16:31 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:25:55AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:52:03PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:32:55PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > + netdev
> > > >
> > >
> > >
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:25:55AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:52:03PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:32:55PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > + netdev
> > >
> >
> > This is sort of useless. What's netdev going to do with a patch they
>
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:52:03PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:32:55PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > + netdev
> >
>
> This is sort of useless. What's netdev going to do with a patch they
> can't apply? I assumed that mellanox was going to take this through
> their
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:32:55PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> + netdev
>
This is sort of useless. What's netdev going to do with a patch they
can't apply? I assumed that mellanox was going to take this through
their tree...
Should I resend the other mlx5 patch as well?
regards,
dan carpe
+ netdev
On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 08:54:36PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> We can't leave "counter" set to an error pointer. Otherwise either it
> will lead to an error pointer dereference later in the function or it
> leads to an error pointer dereference when we call mlx5_fc_destroy().
>
> Fixes
