Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sun, 13 Aug 2023 13:58:04 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Alfred Lee <l00g33k@gmail.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        andrew@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
        kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, sgarzare@redhat.com,
        AVKrasnov@sberdevices.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Wait for EEPROM done before
 HW reset
Message-ID: <20230813105804.2r4zdr6dyqe5dsrf@skbuf>
References: <20230811232832.24321-1-l00g33k@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230811232832.24321-1-l00g33k@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Alfred,

On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 04:28:32PM -0700, Alfred Lee wrote:
> If the switch is reset during active EEPROM transactions, as in
> just after an SoC reset after power up, the I2C bus transaction
> may be cut short leaving the EEPROM internal I2C state machine
> in the wrong state.  When the switch is reset again, the bad
> state machine state may result in data being read from the wrong
> memory location causing the switch to enter unexpect mode
> rendering it inoperational.
> 
> Fixes: 8abbffd27ced ("net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Wait for EEPROM done after HW reset")
> Signed-off-by: Alfred Lee <l00g33k@gmail.com>
> ---

I don't think you understand the meaning of the Fixes: tag. It is
supposed to point to the first commit where the issue being fixed
started being visible. But git show 8abbffd27ced shows:

commit 8abbffd27cedd0f89f69e5ee2ff6841ea01511eb
Author: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@sberdevices.ru>
Date:   Tue Jan 10 10:18:32 2023 +0000

    test/vsock: vsock_perf utility

    This adds utility to check vsock rx/tx performance.

    Usage as sender:
    ./vsock_perf --sender <cid> --port <port> --bytes <bytes to send>
    Usage as receiver:
    ./vsock_perf --port <port> --rcvlowat <SO_RCVLOWAT>

    Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@sberdevices.ru>
    Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
    Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>

So:
1 - that has nothing to do with mv88e6xxx, so it cannot have introduced
    the issue here
2 - there is a mismatch between the blamed commit sha1sum and the blamed
    commit message. In fact, the blamed commit message is _your_ commit
    message, which is not correct.