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 4CB133218E; Mon, 4 Dec 2023 19:47:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="q17UQgS9" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EB87EC433C8; Mon, 4 Dec 2023 19:47:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1701719246; bh=mVecGgq1sbChaepPD/HEGlf3wWNPbPnWtMet4hJ5F78=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=q17UQgS9S5Kai9cMo9y8tTTe+eFTJ28EuhHVuRoZy3vjoRYcM5WtZ/zOlK6I/nCDZ r99MEqJWZ+SFl1cvxSiA/5o95KgESIWhGv/HEOWdE2Cb1tQkgMfoaMtK6O417svEa/ xtkosR4Cj5RqKhODaFzh+aujL6HBSszH9rjYzqjndINGnyGBkSmLdWpTS8M+5GmQ6n FMgcdoeqUYg4UgLp4pzMqy/aMdRSYpS1i/vnboc07LFkDIx9eOVhPLqyeD8A2otaL7 oXHkycsurdmDiYj2elEphyOj5F4DegUh/0gmy2UoGO0Gf8gXKSmFDqt2f7Akdxt0lp Oh4pNRZN2gIgA== Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 11:47:25 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next 0/3] netlink carrier race workaround Message-ID: <20231204114725.76a986f6@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <346b21d87c69f817ea3c37caceb34f1f56255884.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20231201104329.25898-5-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <20231201162844.14d1bbb0@kernel.org> <339c73a6318bf94803a821d5e8ea7d4c736dc78e.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20231202104655.68138ab4@kernel.org> <20231204082354.78122161@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@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, 04 Dec 2023 20:14:10 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > Heh. But do I want to get blamed for the (perhaps inevitable?) > performance regression? I guess I'll try ... I'd happily bet that nobody will notice. Feel free to add: Suggested-by: Jakub Kicinski If that makes it better? > Actually I could even still combine this with the netif carrier up count > in the wireless events, so we only have to do the rtnl_getlink if we > haven't seen an event yet, and - in the likely common case - save the > extra roundtrip? Though I guess it's not a huge problem, it's once per > connection basically. No objections to merging your carrier count patches to wireless, if you prefer to keep them. But it'd be nice to also have a generic mechanism.