Re: [PATCH] net: wan: farsync: disable PCI device on removal

[krzk]

On Wed, 16 Sep 2026 14:31:18 +0800, Guangshuo Li wrote:
> fst_add_one() calls pci_enable_device() to enable the PCI device. The
> probe failure paths call pci_disable_device() to release the matching
> enable reference, but fst_remove_one() does not disable the device
> after a successful probe.
> 
> As a result, the PCI device enable reference remains unbalanced after
> the driver is removed.
> 
> Call pci_disable_device() after the existing interrupt, tasklet,
> mapping, DMA and PCI region cleanup to release the enable reference.
> 
> This issue was found by manual code inspection.
> 
> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Guangshuo Li <lgs201920130244@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wan/farsync.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 


You sent multiple independent patches, to multiple independent
subsystems. The amount of these patches clearly suggest this was
AI generated and most likely not tested.

More importantly, you sent all this work without properly organizing
relevant patches into patchsets. This makes reviewing difficult
and might cause multiple reviewers to address the same issue.
Replying to the entire set is impossible and requires handling each
patch independently, instead of applying or discarding the set.
Maintainers also won't see the bigger picture of your work. Quite
worrying.

This is on the verge of hostile patch: bomb us with so many
contributions, we won't be able to handle them in efficient manner,
like responding ONCE to ask you to slow down.  Considering all this
is untested and LLM generated, I have even more doubts whether this
should be considered for review.

Please read kernel documentation BEFORE posting more work. It will
explain you how to identify subsystems, how to organize your work per
subsystem, how to document usage of LLM and how what you should not
do if this was posted in a good faith.

Best regards,
Krzysztof