Re: [PATCH net-next 02/10] e1000e: add timeout for TX HW time stamping work

["Jakub Kiciński" <moorray3@wp.pl>]

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:44:15 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 19:02 +0100, Jakub Kiciński wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:48:37 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 18:34 +0100, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > Hardware may fail to report time stamp e.g.:
> > > >  - when hardware time stamping is not enabled
> > > >  - when time stamp is requested shortly after ifup
> > > 
> > > trivia:
> > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > > []
> > > > @@ -1155,6 +1155,12 @@ static void e1000e_tx_hwtstamp_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > > >  		skb_tstamp_tx(adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb, &shhwtstamps);
> > > >  		dev_kfree_skb_any(adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb);
> > > >  		adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb = NULL;
> > > > +	} else if (time_after(jiffies, adapter->tx_hwtstamp_start
> > > > +			      + adapter->tx_timeout_factor * HZ)) {
> > > > +		dev_kfree_skb_any(adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb);
> > > > +		adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb = NULL;
> > > > +		adapter->tx_hwtstamp_timeouts++;
> > > > +		e_warn("clearing Tx timestamp hang");
> > > 
> > > Missing \n termination
> > 
> > I copied that line from ixgbe and assumed that the magic macro adds
> > termination...
> > 
> > I see that igb and i40e also lack the \n on similar messages.
> 
> There's a bunch of them.
> 
> >  Can I fix
> > them all in a single follow-up patch?
> 
> There are also a bunch of _dbg messages that lack that
> \n and those seem to be function tracing uses that should
> just be deleted.

Good point!  I'll take care of them too, thanks!

	-- kuba