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 32417236A7C for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2025 12:47:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744030066; cv=none; b=ArA/wFmLY8u70Rc7uhp7Ley5ZQwUUN9GPdAVbu+f4BKJ3mC3jfD7GAsX6j5+Fciq7hvvb6rR6EXqT0WBwHHiOlpkEEWGeWy4a7X7MEkHJUenLuta2Tf+6vasTkuxjP4U2pnJH3pDQQaor/UVqNj1L6cuz4VkEtKV0L1NfhbbxHw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744030066; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IaB8foPsgHa6VHTC6ye/QBFhLDTe7BVG+PauPaynAM0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZI32Cb5gUPLasCk774KtlCAkdKyntNuXRFYsEqLEhvF8dedO1D2Urqu0Yc+uC1oOFdmy5ItM5SPxBMSpBmqlTpL7sxF+11KiZmN0K7KEVnrP7pSInulOGYjM63x1gSPs0TjSatSsR4JWFRv9jYU3yWwY6yUXb2o/fMq45KvGhMs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=sPlW1FxO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="sPlW1FxO" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6B116C4CEDD; Mon, 7 Apr 2025 12:47:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1744030065; bh=IaB8foPsgHa6VHTC6ye/QBFhLDTe7BVG+PauPaynAM0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=sPlW1FxOtPxLrYXc/E+Hd7eE9R4F7FlzvjlfXg0KlgJlq2KBXepi0oPo2kRm4LJEh M3jhM5oBaQm4a5TzPxXiFOm1sp3KVXljAclJVxjPC5ZnYcnP4ShWSBgJ9n86bKvstI Ahnzske/3EYalXgGFqKcuRgk+ZqJY7kOp76VBBHjYaNamRLhCPiINT5qn7dH3M3x0m brdfZ5cyF7ZuUNPZWw5lvK4Z7G8ETZGxNwFbbHzjCpgzJQVrPsFPVSVADoRDcYkHjl rFMrtRh6xuQuaHwhRMUFcNa11iBBGUIAhRn6Rh9/SovRBhFew/VHrKfQEmwBf81iau reQOUL7AYE7zQ== Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 13:47:41 +0100 From: Simon Horman To: Kurt Kanzenbach Cc: Tony Nguyen , Przemek Kitszel , Faizal Rahim , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v4 1/2] igc: Limit netdev_tc calls to MQPRIO Message-ID: <20250407124741.GJ395307@horms.kernel.org> References: <20250321-igc_mqprio_tx_mode-v4-0-4571abb6714e@linutronix.de> <20250321-igc_mqprio_tx_mode-v4-1-4571abb6714e@linutronix.de> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250321-igc_mqprio_tx_mode-v4-1-4571abb6714e@linutronix.de> On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 02:52:38PM +0100, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: > Limit netdev_tc calls to MQPRIO. Currently these calls are made in > igc_tsn_enable_offload() and igc_tsn_disable_offload() which are used by > TAPRIO and ETF as well. However, these are only required for MQPRIO. > > Signed-off-by: Kurt Kanzenbach Hi Kurt, Thanks for the update. And I apologise that I now have question. I see that: * This patch moves logic from igc_tsn_disable_offload() and igc_tsn_enable_offload() to igc_tsn_enable_mqprio(). * That both igc_tsn_disable_offload() and igc_tsn_enable_offload() are only called from igc_tsn_reset(). * And that based on the description, this looks good for the case where igc_tsn_reset() is called from igc_tsn_offload_apply(). This is because igc_tsn_offload_apply() is called from igc_tsn_enable_mqprio(). All good so far. But my question is about the case where igc_tsn_reset() is called from igc_reset(). Does the logic previously present in igc_tsn_enable_offload() and igc_tsn_disable_offload() need to run in that case? And, if so, how is that handled?