Re: Some clarifications on the upstreaming process

On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 12:34:42PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:

On 9/9/26 12:23 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 11:23:56AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:

quoted

On 9/9/26 8:38 AM, Steffen Klassert wrote:

quoted

I need some clarifications on how to handle future ipsec patches.
Since we have the AI-generated patches and patch reviews things
changed quite a bit and I have problems to upstream ipsec fixes.

I have the following problematic situations:

1) Sashiko found nothing in the original patch submisstion,
but found an issue when I resent the patch with the pull
request. I think this can be solved by asking the author
to send an incremental fix on top of the ipsec tree if
it does not happen too often.

This is usually the correct approach, with some exceptions i.e. the
newly found issue is impactful (the new code is exploitable).

Are you willing to pull this as is, or should I resend the pull
request with the incremental fix? The latter leads to problem
4.1 (patch does not apply to net).

Due to time schedule I can't look into the series detail before tomorrow
my time. Since Jakub forwarded the AI report and left the series in PW I
assume he is looking for your replies to the AI comments - which is
pretty much would I'll do.

It was a general question, not directly related to this pull request.

There were several issues reported, it will take a bit of time
to review the AI comments.