From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out systim sanitization
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 21:32:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160802013214.GU36313@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160727150155.GF36313@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:01:55AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 02:09:13PM +0000, Avargil, Raanan wrote:
> >> This is prepatory work for an expanding list of adapter families that have occasional ~10 hour clock jumps when being used for PTP. Factor out the sanitization function and convert to using a feature (bug) flag, per suggestion from Jesse Brandeburg.
> >>
> >> Littering functional code with device-specific checks is much messier than simply checking a flag, and having device-specific init set flags as needed.
> >> There are probably a number of other cases in the e1000e code that could/should be converted similarly.
> >
> > Looks ok to me.
> > Adding Chris who asked what happens if we reach the max retry counter (E1000_MAX_82574_SYSTIM_REREAD)?
> > This counter is set to 50.
> > Can you, for testing purposes, decreased this value (or even set it to 0) and see what happens?
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have direct access to the affected hardware myself,
> so I'd have to prep a test build, hand it off to someone and play relay. I
> could do that, but it'd have some lag and possible multiple round-trips...
> Anyone inside Intel have hardware handy to test on? :p
Was tied up with other work the middle of last week, then on vacation for
a bit. There was some testing feedback provided from someone at neither
Red Hat or Intel, but I'm not sure where it leaves us right now. What
needs to happen next?
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod at redhat.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
To: "Avargil, Raanan" <raanan.avargil@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Hall, Christopher S" <christopher.s.hall@intel.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out systim sanitization
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 21:32:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160802013214.GU36313@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160727150155.GF36313@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:01:55AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 02:09:13PM +0000, Avargil, Raanan wrote:
> >> This is prepatory work for an expanding list of adapter families that have occasional ~10 hour clock jumps when being used for PTP. Factor out the sanitization function and convert to using a feature (bug) flag, per suggestion from Jesse Brandeburg.
> >>
> >> Littering functional code with device-specific checks is much messier than simply checking a flag, and having device-specific init set flags as needed.
> >> There are probably a number of other cases in the e1000e code that could/should be converted similarly.
> >
> > Looks ok to me.
> > Adding Chris who asked what happens if we reach the max retry counter (E1000_MAX_82574_SYSTIM_REREAD)?
> > This counter is set to 50.
> > Can you, for testing purposes, decreased this value (or even set it to 0) and see what happens?
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have direct access to the affected hardware myself,
> so I'd have to prep a test build, hand it off to someone and play relay. I
> could do that, but it'd have some lag and possible multiple round-trips...
> Anyone inside Intel have hardware handy to test on? :p
Was tied up with other work the middle of last week, then on vacation for
a bit. There was some testing feedback provided from someone at neither
Red Hat or Intel, but I'm not sure where it leaves us right now. What
needs to happen next?
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-02 1:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-19 20:25 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net] e1000e: fix PTP on e1000_pch_lpt variants Jarod Wilson
2016-07-19 20:25 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-19 20:49 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Rustad, Mark D
2016-07-19 20:49 ` Rustad, Mark D
2016-07-20 17:05 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-20 17:05 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-20 11:01 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-07-20 11:01 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-07-23 16:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] e1000e: fix PTP on e1000_pch_variants Jarod Wilson
2016-07-23 16:44 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-23 16:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 1/2] e1000e: factor out systim sanitization Jarod Wilson
2016-07-23 16:44 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-23 16:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 2/2] e1000e: fix PTP on e1000_pch_lpt variants Jarod Wilson
2016-07-23 16:44 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-25 17:56 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] e1000e: fix PTP on e1000_pch_variants Jesse Brandeburg
2016-07-25 17:56 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2016-07-26 17:39 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 3/2] e1000e: convert systim overflow check to use flags2 Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 17:39 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 17:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jeff Kirsher
2016-07-26 17:53 ` Jeff Kirsher
2016-07-26 17:58 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 17:58 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 18:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 0/2] e1000e: fix PTP on e1000_pch_variants Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 18:25 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 18:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out systim sanitization Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 18:25 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-27 14:09 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Avargil, Raanan
2016-07-27 14:09 ` Avargil, Raanan
2016-07-27 15:01 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-27 15:01 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-08-02 1:32 ` Jarod Wilson [this message]
2016-08-02 1:32 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-08-02 7:33 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-08-02 7:33 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-08-11 15:48 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-08-11 15:48 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-07-27 21:15 ` Woodford, Timothy W.
2016-07-27 21:15 ` Woodford, Timothy W.
2016-07-29 14:40 ` Woodford, Timothy W.
2016-07-29 14:40 ` Woodford, Timothy W.
2016-08-04 19:34 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-08-04 19:34 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-08-04 19:30 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-08-04 19:30 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-07-26 18:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 2/2] e1000e: fix PTP on e1000_pch_lpt variants Jarod Wilson
2016-07-26 18:25 ` Jarod Wilson
2016-08-04 19:31 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Brown, Aaron F
2016-08-04 19:31 ` Brown, Aaron F
2016-07-24 20:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net] " kbuild test robot
2016-07-24 20:30 ` kbuild test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160802013214.GU36313@redhat.com \
--to=jarod@redhat.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.