From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Cochran Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [net-next] igb: add function to set I210 transmit mode Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 18:11:03 +0200 Message-ID: <20160813161103.GA1188@localhost.localdomain> References: <1470811692-24574-1-git-send-email-gangfeng.huang@ni.com> <1470811692-24574-2-git-send-email-gangfeng.huang@ni.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Gangfeng , Netdev , intel-wired-lan To: Alexander Duyck Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:33127 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752630AbcHMQLJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Aug 2016 12:11:09 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id o80so3009507wme.0 for ; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 09:11:09 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 08:27:38AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > I really don' think this patch is going to work. If you are going to > implement something like this and have a hope to get it accepted into > the Linux kernel you need to come up with a solution that will work > fore more than this one device. We don't want the drivers having to > carry around their own sysfs controls for things that really are not > proprietary to the device. There needs to be a generic kernel > interface for this. The fact is something like QAV more than likely > exists on other devices as well so it may be worth while to look into > seeing if you could come up with some way of interfacing this with > either ethtool ,iproute2, or maybe even the DCB/LLDP utilities since > this is essentially splitting the Tx into two separate traffic > classes. Yes to all of this. > Also for these kind of patches it would be best to include the netdev > mailing list. That way it can be reviewed by a wider audience and you > are much more likely to get this accepted upstream rather than have it > rejected when Jeff Kirsher attempts to submit it. Right. We just had a discussion about implementing TSN, and we will need proper infrastructure in place *before* we start hacking drivers. Thanks, Richard