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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9658C04AB3 for ; Wed, 29 May 2019 04:49:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD4321734 for ; Wed, 29 May 2019 04:49:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="pMPu4bTr" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725992AbfE2EtR (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 May 2019 00:49:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com ([209.85.215.194]:40583 "EHLO mail-pg1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725840AbfE2EtQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 May 2019 00:49:16 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id d30so575658pgm.7; Tue, 28 May 2019 21:49:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UBkxEJYcGn6+s1SysMWi5wo25MUrw19X+MbK0vtZQEU=; b=pMPu4bTrEd96EezjpUlQV3YFd6XRMwzsxzvluGGivPkNhxxKWnUS7ExAxoUZUrPU56 6mXhn4gceGJaPX4T81BuQJaDu8ZqCzQeSeYnPbullUCio6WveRQWMSSPpUDc9sEYgVPx 4SGxbnZM1MeCbOT5e7A2+5MuOfRQ41zhzqmegduQl1Wr9n9Wmiz2+PZ1c4oXIQRbodql 8Abe08sux/7uDsj2pELrrkGJ6ukjjHSIh+HHJIXCdZHOSZ+PbQhY/Smdkse6iD+6m/ZV KJEozcWxOk0i7Wao93DbaptJXLVLy5hcnI/Hl1DynYoQzAVRP4tQdwf1yQwnhaeU5USu RQgw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UBkxEJYcGn6+s1SysMWi5wo25MUrw19X+MbK0vtZQEU=; b=Mnjncr1PuvoMwyAP6NvakwjhYpJZBre/VHOtYeupLh5g14+HMkXiZTBBTESX5iQBjH FMsFyCJWNTZlGkPsDRF6ic+Jg3s7NamDww/4+4N+Pf7qZKomc1T7bEtaE85DJTrayQ9v aFI6h3LbzHGDsmNGjhy5V4ZqzDOVSV3OfKW2aTSjyQxwclg6tJL5cStSiiXD2wpYX8pz NqPyeqmPgh17ItCz/G2m27vLwRb9a9+ODFKAud14nDqOeUNN1eaiZFN3Hc/Z7Lqe9nlv 3km8R7UYLxBZck06C2OkdBBYLRD3yMHsW9yhy9wEL/KoQbsZibJX2DQEd6L5DrtrOxmd 3M5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX6zuBQSat70XdiDOAHk/LBmmtV01F/WJjZI1iVaR14YmI8OVIo 8YAJYOPrtBTx7i/4WenH+N8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxoUje5duyDnEPS6mGgFOvSrW7Zm05auAFcO9KUVG4bFBZoHWQfwrAjWSyXs16iRP4C5VsYSA== X-Received: by 2002:a65:494a:: with SMTP id q10mr41447263pgs.201.1559105356065; Tue, 28 May 2019 21:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c-73-222-71-142.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.222.71.142]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r7sm4255547pjb.8.2019.05.28.21.49.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 28 May 2019 21:49:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 21:49:12 -0700 From: Richard Cochran To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: f.fainelli@gmail.com, vivien.didelot@gmail.com, andrew@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, john.stultz@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de, sboyd@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Let taggers specify a can_timestamp function Message-ID: <20190529044912.cyg44rqvdo73oeiu@localhost> References: <20190528235627.1315-1-olteanv@gmail.com> <20190528235627.1315-4-olteanv@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190528235627.1315-4-olteanv@gmail.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 02:56:25AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > The newly introduced function is called on both the RX and TX paths. NAK on this patch. > The boolean returned by port_txtstamp should only return false if the > driver tried to timestamp the skb but failed. So you say. > Currently there is some logic in the mv88e6xxx driver that determines > whether it should timestamp frames or not. > > This is wasteful, because if the decision is to not timestamp them, then > DSA will have cloned an skb and freed it immediately afterwards. No, it isn't wasteful. Look at the tests in that driver to see why. > Additionally other drivers (sja1105) may have other hardware criteria > for timestamping frames on RX, and the default conditions for > timestamping a frame are too restrictive. I'm sorry, but we won't change the frame just for one device that has design issues. Please put device specific workarounds into its driver. Thanks, Richard