From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F665194A73 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2025 23:50:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762818625; cv=none; b=MgTblfLpb1xnfyKk9clyJLulej0txhiv/iDy7K6e9gT+Ose2ETw3ZWr+aKDxiiI7dzt3L6mWs0M6BCRiRQW1r1rrtxnUQMcYLYXTuRoJCUakmnujJfkxfsWyeMEuqc5Fr2IgMhAPKho8gd9tYPRNH9ct5VrBWMj0PtN10T3y7HE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762818625; c=relaxed/simple; bh=y45suLg81vCAyMVQdSL4eUJYbnZsIPoSZLQ0cfyNDfE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=O3d8RPyjrYe72TcOsxMeW5fsweiyQ8wrOnbweDlzTfZOS8DkTpMHLsSE6vwipVOXiMF8/60O/FwTiYha+NW9BHAxNMFSrG5XXadKyKJLIcUG4ECTBthfKh83IjyREo0l9lZCqCsL0Au6aa6WOP1eMU4D4DaL7l/eI6VtafpYZUQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=kYhj8Lbf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="kYhj8Lbf" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C5BAC4CEFB; Mon, 10 Nov 2025 23:50:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1762818625; bh=y45suLg81vCAyMVQdSL4eUJYbnZsIPoSZLQ0cfyNDfE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=kYhj8LbfK5g8lfZRdGQnSNWzaOXlQU06NYbUCKg1kw0Ei4hRfhhtANqtaOGkiNkCh f5qYs8PP9t2EdPUwzY6KF6DWa/b11JzSKp7TAw/GB+CDQmgrYsBu53LsvjtNZr6sDu w8A9WscSMMc53mG6OoBZ5RpvY1DiWJQUiZE59/z1E6f4uyO3pJIKnL3SZxBHQhEXhd AxkZ8awod3mKmfXPaVfaNHs9vVVlnshD7LzFs1FebVzCDRz/1+7OiG5CmuFdUVDHh3 MW1tIOeZYi+O6xIZL36wC3zQ9fQOFOFiD4frUIUzCPo6xwhs7AM1DRC/GNK82eX7SM LUDGNunbPo5Eg== Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 15:50:24 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Jacob Keller Cc: Vadim Fedorenko , Manish Chopra , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Richard Cochran , Simon Horman , Kory Maincent , Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] bnx2x: convert to use ndo_hwtstamp callbacks Message-ID: <20251110155024.0436b087@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <8a91d75b-3ba7-47be-9176-5d2245ac4fd5@intel.com> References: <20251106213717.3543174-1-vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev> <20251106213717.3543174-2-vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev> <20251107184102.65b0f765@kernel.org> <8a91d75b-3ba7-47be-9176-5d2245ac4fd5@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 15:23:23 -0800 Jacob Keller wrote: > On 11/8/2025 4:38 AM, Vadim Fedorenko wrote: > > On 08/11/2025 02:41, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >> On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 21:37:16 +0000 Vadim Fedorenko wrote: > >> This is the wrong way around, if someone adds a new value unsupported > >> by the driver it will pass. We should be listing the supported types > >> and > >> > >> default: > >> ...ERR_MSG.. > >> return -ERANGE; > >> } > > > > But that's the original logic of the driver. Should I change it within > > the same patch, or is it better to make a follow-up work to clean such > > things in net-next? That's partially true, note that the original code did not have a default clause. So (IIUC) compiler would warn us if we added a new enum value without adding it in this driver. You're adding defaults. > I'd prefer a separate patch for clarity. A backport is probably > unnecessary since I doubt we'll add a new timestamp mode in such a > backport in the future.. but functional changes like that make sense as > a separate patch. Yup, I think I asked for separate patch originally. Perhpas I wasn't clear enough.