From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (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 4079414F70; Sat, 14 Feb 2026 23:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771111607; cv=none; b=RdDSYa+MXClDu8Y8EQBBUUoN7GA8wCwX3qWbefXrnUkx9owjw/5sl9Zzm9C8TAefmpkX4vnBis9y7HQXeDSybMcnTkkHia1kljyooLovDrkYmzEnXLSHBhQ7MQX7cPcLJOCpggvQN9yeviH3Pi4Kbk6w+K2ifqmqruQ+yIkzgKc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771111607; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ENEwz6LdmKpREpK8bhdMo739PNLmgWrRKaleXuhgM9E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=HGgmmgh2BJe3GOuk/J7VHMkO2jpcu6Cii3sKGgbFAl6hpdD/+ov3j67aJgoQtUvtuCvIHjhUNG6ZuLXSxAsh3b+e/a5FxdYDUaEM7qzT34E+6Pc8Y2sCd8+ZL36w5KSJS9qSBL4wnFQOgFOyKb4as4UVX+XLuCRwkkhF728+wcc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=p4F08vC3; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=uICWyFb3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="p4F08vC3"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="uICWyFb3" Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2026 00:26:42 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1771111604; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ENEwz6LdmKpREpK8bhdMo739PNLmgWrRKaleXuhgM9E=; b=p4F08vC3S9ncfwCsy+GC+uvHmCPqndlBDnPCI1cCe7xrldv/S6qptCWcB8z21LE+XakRlE kVAJ7N2LDStDBzyLj2KH4iEYR5v4lHrjqlsv5EvL/H07h4BOR0/5IYyvNYq6loCjQMjAbs MTcdWXzf3gHIDqfXu7dlhbP71RMPMZilSuSR7STlS2lAVUQvzPunCVh1rNXsjXrIHbm/g0 GZEKwFhVDwtGt4xZsEM8XSyJ1lxnEfh6K0ZEvuBIBO5Ky/USMLYFWz9WBVynhHM2l2oTw0 5D3+FEpL/lElTCDHnqgblFkUABnvbT9/2aF8K+QMvjpgShNWHn5JAtfhHNi3LQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1771111604; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ENEwz6LdmKpREpK8bhdMo739PNLmgWrRKaleXuhgM9E=; b=uICWyFb3Mg9VCEgcxdsOdktkOgtEGy3Ipqgg2Xgr5xVnr1LlnzMCJWJLOA1YowSBrvVt/e bbdDt2tkdK9JuUDQ== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Willem de Bruijn Cc: Kurt Kanzenbach , Vadim Fedorenko , Willem de Bruijn , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" , "Loktionov, Aleksandr" , "Nguyen, Anthony L" , "Kitszel, Przemyslaw" , Paul Menzel , "Gomes, Vinicius" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Richard Cochran , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Lunn , "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" , "Keller, Jacob E" Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v3] igb: Retrieve Tx timestamp directly from interrupt for i210 Message-ID: <20260214232642.6j_2036G@linutronix.de> References: <20260209090621.GiZqTiMJ@linutronix.de> <8e762437-69f9-40d7-bb75-3a45bef1d5d6@linux.dev> <20260209114836.GPU-vnnh@linutronix.de> <78e2af2c-40e6-43f1-9471-42f350e69389@linux.dev> <20260210121207.9kLHroS0@linutronix.de> <87qzqr5vos.fsf@jax.kurt.home> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 2026-02-11 11:29:43 [-0500], Willem de Bruijn wrote: > I think we should look at the locking. It is not clear to me that > sk_callback_lock needs to be held here at all. It can go away, posted https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260214232456.A37oV4KQ@linutronix.de/ Sebastian