Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] net: macb: Add XDP support and page pool integration

From: Paolo Valerio <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2026 16:37:44 +0100

On 13 Feb 2026 at 05:57:17 PM, Théo Lebrun <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hello Paolo,
>
> My XSK series (based on top of yours) is ready.
> I won't be sending it while net-next is closed, of course.
>

Nice!
Same for this series, will respin when net-next will reopen.

> It starts with a few cleanup/rework patches that have no direct link to
> XSK and touch code you add in this series. They could be appended to
> your next revision or even squashed (with the right SoB &
> Co-developed-by trailers) for most.
>
> Some contain bug fixes, mostly related to stats accounting. I expect
> some amount of discussion as well, mostly regarding the page pool DMA
> direction.
>

I quickly looked at the patches.

As we briefly discussed off-list, in my plans stats were considered as a
follow up. I intentionally kept them out of the series and to keep it
smaller.
Given you added them, I guess it's perfectly fine if you include
the patch directly in your series (unless maintainers prefer/suggest
otherwise). The same should apply for macb_tx_complete() rework.
That being said, IMO, we should account xdp stats separately instead of
including them in the generic ones.

The one about DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL is already part of this review cycle
(see bot's reply to 5/8) and already incorporated. I'm also considering
the possibility a change that make this no longer relevant anyways, but
I'm not sure as it was planned as a follow up.

Regarding the patches containing simple renames, I don't think they
require a Co-developed-by. The reasoning follows the same logic I
applied to the patch you authored in my series; while I addressed a NULL
dereference, it didn't seem significant enough to mark the entire patch
as co-developed.
The same goes for the style change patch, it doesn't change any logic,
it's just a cosmetic change that normally go through the regular review
process, but if you think it requires a separate patch, feel free to
follow up on this in your series.

Paolo

> Patches don't have the proper Fixes tags, sorry about that.
> I'll send them as reply to this email.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com