Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/3 net-next] e1000: Allocate pm_qos_req as needed

[Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1470 bytes --]

On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 09:48 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 04/10/15 at 10:01am, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > On 04/10/2015 06:35 AM, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > >On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 17:08 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > >>On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 01:43 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > >>>e1000 is the only driver requiring pm_qos_req, instead of causing
> > >>>every device to waste up to 240 bytes. Allocate it for the specific
> > >>>driver.
> > >>>
> > >>>Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
> > >>>---
> > >>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 15 +++++++++++----
> > >>>  include/linux/netdevice.h                  |  2 +-
> > >>>  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >>Small nitpick, it is e1000e not e1000 that you are modifying.
> > >
> > >So other than the patch title and description referencing e1000 instead
> > >of e1000e, patch looks fine.
> > >
> > >Acked-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
> > 
> > Thanks for working towards reducing struct net_device, that's awesome!
> > 
> > Wrt this patch, I'm wondering if that couldn't be pushed down into
> > struct e1000_adapter entirely?
> 
> Sure, since I need to respin this anyway. Jeff are you OK with that?

I am trying to think why we did not do it earlier, but I am not coming
up with anything at the moment.  So, go ahead.

In the meantime, I will talk with Bruce Allan tomorrow to see if he
remembers why we did not do it.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]