Re: [PATCH v13 09/11] can: bcm: fix stale rx/tx ops after device removal

On 14.07.2026 13:47:35, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> > > > Pre-existing issues:
> > > > - [High] Unprotected concurrent access to op->rx_stamp and op->rx_ifindex in bcm_rx_handler causes data races and torn 64-bit reads on 32-bit architectures.
> > >
> > > Fixed in patch 10
> >
> > Pre-existing issues are not a shot stopper, _new_ issues for a patch
> > series are...usually are.
> >
> > Hopefully upstream will accept that you fix issues in a later patch that
> > sashiko claim to be introduced by a patch in the series.

Sorry, let me clarify: This was a general statement.

I don't want to imply that _this_ patch introduces a new issue.

If you remove sashiko from this sentence it was valid before the LLM
review bots. Rule of thumb: You should not introduce "bad" code and fix
it later in a series. - As this is a huge amount of fixes that requires
a lot of code changes, I hope upstream doesn't insist.

> Is it?
>
> Patch 10 Fixes: ffd980f976e7 ("[CAN]: Add broadcast manager (bcm) protocol")
>
> not anything in patch 9.

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde          |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de |
Vertretung Nürnberg              | Phone: +49-5121-206917-129 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-9   |

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYKAB0WIQSl+MghEFFAdY3pYJLMOmT6rpmt0gUCalYtTwAKCRDMOmT6rpmt
0gdeAQDYjOLvI8eCLsWleVqR1/NB9/G1AI4Axbw7U3/o3itihQEA8P8Mshu4pTuc
+MSrpmLOjU265qYJvnWKeSSBRN7HzQw=
=AuPW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----