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 A9478DF76; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 02:35:29 +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=1771986929; cv=none; b=s1kt18YxXNVlMOdbdkYNiRWtrWAamYXhBq/UKhlEQLDuZ09nI0k8Jn8EIBMSSN3Ng0gw81mGlJTH6j7xyGDjCVIITQSXVNpYwSUU3vwM1rH0ll2l+z/mRpcR3LDAHQ+3bTiM0q7dKMAIoeHCWK569ZwDCkVPFn7IwhIPnqmLSLc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771986929; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GCNigCkhCxhmteC3OPykN+XbAA3IA5VTyCCE/lVMn40=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HYxjqmxSwiuGRuvdvYy0vEDvgh1cRNmO+egcpcvXNJAqe0UCZJW504TewO0gXjHcGXYnC2Q+8XcQWOwA5WyjH4J83kM97WBeQsqjYHOfSxQKCd0cJDYMw7hCjCfgPqjPXEDANZEGTfhfI/JVHRwltqhX3MIjqUxgrEqu1sEr+Mw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=eJLP7rf0; 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="eJLP7rf0" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 050C9C116D0; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 02:35:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1771986929; bh=GCNigCkhCxhmteC3OPykN+XbAA3IA5VTyCCE/lVMn40=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=eJLP7rf0sURe5/cf2E8qt0ItrntJaYQJlsqC5hQahjcrNecOUPRlhyn1+qzQWAk8I pW6nI60fiVR5Hl0Je6ro8GRJZPDCbkpXEANXXvyDcy2j1szAj48aGgAr3MxJJZiPnQ T48XdHSiACHTBvHGCzutBasM9BeFQB3nN/S690Z93C3g6Isn+QjVkqjLN0QrxROm2c Ln2JGV9T2wBLyq0wcupdu57e+WG8MUD0ZJRCM0D6kN8V9PbmB+LT8GAypRyScqVEvo cZe0U5RE/K1D3Izqy2G5oc4g4bL/clRVWC/8zaIN/kKRRPD8bFzFTLmlP6MvVWoAUK F+WjUqc8FL2fg== Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 18:35:28 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Bhargava Marreddy Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michael.chan@broadcom.com, pavan.chebbi@broadcom.com, vsrama-krishna.nemani@broadcom.com, vikas.gupta@broadcom.com, Rajashekar Hudumula , Ajit Kumar Khaparde Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/7] bng_en: query PHY capabilities and report link status Message-ID: <20260224183528.757e1174@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260223163641.755200-3-bhargava.marreddy@broadcom.com> References: <20260223163641.755200-1-bhargava.marreddy@broadcom.com> <20260223163641.755200-3-bhargava.marreddy@broadcom.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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, 23 Feb 2026 22:06:36 +0530 Bhargava Marreddy wrote: > + /* To protect link related settings during link changes and > + * ethtool settings changes. > + */ > + struct mutex link_lock; > + struct bnge_link_info link_info; Why does link deserve its own lock? Are the operations slow? bnxt was written before the netdev instance lock existed, if you're just trying to avoid taking rtnl_lock the instance lock would do.