[PATCH 0/9] Update ICE base driver

[Medvedkin, Vladimir]

Hi Bruce,

It looks false positive to me.

-----Original Message-----
From: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com> 
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2026 11:39 AM
To: Medvedkin, Vladimir <vladimir.medvedkin at intel.com>
Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Update ICE base driver

On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 04:51:56PM +0000, Vladimir Medvedkin wrote:
> Update the ICE base driver to the latest shared code snapshot:
> 
> - Bounds check, integer overflow and type fixes
> - New capability and NVM definitions
> - New E835 10GBASE-T device ID
> 
> Chinh Cao (2):
>   net/ice/base: add NVM definitions for Wake-on-LAN config
>   net/ice/base: add E835 10GBASE-T device ID
> 
> Deepthi Kavalur (1):
>   net/ice/base: fix loop counter type in recipe creation
> 
> Janardhanan Arumugam (1):
>   net/ice/base: fix out-of-bounds accesses in DDP and NVM code
> 
> Krzysztof Galazka (1):
>   net/ice/base: fix integer overflow in RL profile calculation
> 
> Przemyslaw Gierszynski (1):
>   net/ice/base: add RDE WoL override capability bit
> 
> Stefan Wegrzyn (2):
>   net/ice/base: add PQC certificate provisioning capability
>   net/ice/base: add NVM write flags for eRoT minSREV update
> 
> Vladimir Medvedkin (1):
>   net/ice/base: update version info
> 
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/README           |  2 +-
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_adminq_cmd.h |  6 ++++++
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_common.c     |  6 ++++++
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_ddp.c        | 19 ++++++++++++-------
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_devids.h     | 14 ++++++++------
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_nvm.c        |  4 ++--
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_sched.c      | 18 ++++++++----------
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_switch.c     |  2 +-
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/base/ice_type.h       | 16 +++++++++++++++-
>  drivers/net/intel/ice/ice_ethdev.c          |  1 +
>  10 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
CI shows a couple of failures when testing this patchset. I'm not sure if they are false positives though (for example a flags autotest failure).
Can you please check and confirm?

/Bruce