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=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 0295DC433EF for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 20:42:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE12B206A1 for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 20:42:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=lunn.ch header.i=@lunn.ch header.b="XJ6NPqsz" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729751AbfIHUmy (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2019 16:42:54 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:34794 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729697AbfIHUmy (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2019 16:42:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lunn.ch; s=20171124; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=QwXDVTAzTIEmbO6mkRqj9yinliGr7+s9z9v4Dam4EXQ=; b=XJ6NPqszO/x2cjMB+vINoqXTF3 rRX0VYHp1xP4w1nJmp7+LMuDXIVp/Ly03njSNQG29lCn4NQ8X6P1nv/fua33DOiBSDHlslW4c0ClC lvuK8q1yJAE//jjtTOqtxLw+KBemRGjw/NbqmJe7Iua9XgBRGM8ITWaUzpiWGAADbZ5g=; Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i740u-0001Ac-CM; Sun, 08 Sep 2019 22:42:24 +0200 Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2019 22:42:24 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: David Miller , f.fainelli@gmail.com, vivien.didelot@gmail.com, vinicius.gomes@intel.com, vedang.patel@intel.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, weifeng.voon@intel.com, jiri@mellanox.com, m-karicheri2@ti.com, Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com, ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, kurt.kanzenbach@linutronix.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/15] tc-taprio offload for SJA1105 DSA Message-ID: <20190908204224.GA2730@lunn.ch> References: <20190902162544.24613-1-olteanv@gmail.com> <20190906.145403.657322945046640538.davem@davemloft.net> <20190907144548.GA21922@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 12:07:27PM +0100, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > I think Richard has been there when the taprio, etf qdiscs, SO_TXTIME > were first defined and developed: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/808504/ > I expect he is capable of delivering a competent review of the entire > series, possibly way more competent than my patch set itself. > > The reason why I'm not splitting it up is because I lose around 10 ns > of synchronization offset when using the hardware-corrected PTPCLKVAL > clock for timestamping rather than the PTPTSCLK free-running counter. Hi Vladimir I'm not suggesting anything is wrong with your concept, when i say split it up. It is more than when somebody sees 15 patches, they decide they don't have the time at the moment, and put it off until later. And often later never happens. If however they see a smaller number of patches, they think that yes they have time now, and do the review. So if you are struggling to get something reviewed, make it more appealing for the reviewer. Salami tactics. Andrew