From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36B5DFF8875 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D445240A64; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9GSK2D7t_gpI; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Comment: SPF check N/A for local connections - client-ip=140.211.166.142; helo=lists1.osuosl.org; envelope-from=intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org; receiver= DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 5C8D8423B4 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=osuosl.org; s=default; t=1777464074; bh=itr8NWOHQ6V8gxzf86xpcySPtZbv4JBsseEIXm5Jbts=; h=From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=xDbiaBI4kOu10U+elJGFZx6ikKGO7J9L5T0rF7w7JdyXOta9uDaQrVlSx15zC07re s/V5mIgYeyMCx32dpM8b6pAgzACoMkmA1C7in7n16dgdIMdLMRlqB35c2FMauGBZuK h9t/VYftIFjE6t39hfWov8G/df9qJxp1TcHQKYtw1L0e7/ibK2M/dKdqW3S4zjeXy7 2a3zCzsxV9NeOROlw1CPbZhxLEnMmenM00wbecztpVGjGD0tKYgftQYBCvw52a0xN0 5V4mzEAndQWWspA4UBIDlv1voNGCJzU4aPOsHOmsReeMA+QYWPFS70zp92I4HtB/e2 lI1DX6yKUcGYQ== Received: from lists1.osuosl.org (lists1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.142]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8D8423B4; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF6AF1B8 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C26615CE for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id hCLhxW14MTvP for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:07 +0000 (UTC) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=170.10.129.124; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com; envelope-from=jtornosm@redhat.com; receiver= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp3.osuosl.org 0503F60E93 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 0503F60E93 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0503F60E93 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:01:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-251-1K6ZWJ6kO1qRKGz_ssUZRQ-1; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:00:57 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 1K6ZWJ6kO1qRKGz_ssUZRQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 1K6ZWJ6kO1qRKGz_ssUZRQ_1777464054 Received: from mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E300180036E; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:00:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora.redhat.com (unknown [10.44.32.45]) by mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23490195608E; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:00:48 +0000 (UTC) From: Jose Ignacio Tornos Martinez To: aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com Cc: anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, jacob.e.keller@intel.com, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, jtornosm@redhat.com, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com, stable@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:00:47 +0200 Message-ID: <20260429120047.218369-1-jtornosm@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.17 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: OlkpxZU-cwO3f9miVgXOi4kZm9AOD43Wyanm4sQrUUE_1777464054 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; x-default=true X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1777464064; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=itr8NWOHQ6V8gxzf86xpcySPtZbv4JBsseEIXm5Jbts=; b=gmbq5HwLDRW096MNBwaUny9nxneH1G9YxpwYfz/ouMkiJ+bCt7WHXGl5BgKKnGbXEbaUrf P0zJy+ldUpA03W7YvvCXO5/vsltabE06KtKWM1E/xrlayCwbIy+v4nuo2L0EfuQvjRsrgr Ei9CFzY2ApGSxDy2z7waoEKjOy0ynRk= X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=gmbq5HwL Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net v5 3/4] iavf: send MAC change request synchronously X-BeenThere: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Wired Ethernet Linux Kernel Driver Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org Sender: "Intel-wired-lan" Hello Aleksandr, > I think continue at the end of the cycle is redundant. That continue is intentional; without it, if timeout expires but there are still messages in the queue, we give up without processing them. The message we're waiting for might be in the queue and not a lot of messages stored are expected. That continue reduces possible false timeouts (because the expected message could be stored in the queue) while keeping the delay minimal. The timeout is really just an estimate, and I don't think it needs to be very precise. Thanks Best regards Jose Ignacio