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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED 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 5B30DC282CE for ; Thu, 23 May 2019 01:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97CA82089E for ; Thu, 23 May 2019 01:05:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=fpond.eu header.i=@fpond.eu header.b="OAUyoqWO" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728795AbfEWBFv (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 21:05:51 -0400 Received: from mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([85.215.255.54]:26480 "EHLO mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727691AbfEWBFv (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 21:05:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1558573549; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=fpond.eu; h=Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Cc:To:From:Date: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=8VaFhlt3Sv+uRqmY+OUjVcUQP1dzNRTWZVk7slXg7j8=; b=OAUyoqWOIVBOtP4Velp/PXn3grMfZg+uXzcGM8C7S0OSYuJolqOivoC8LbrgzKo5lS q3q27edKHDs0K9WQSzfhm3JDiWCngUyPGhVP+PsluueT7hWWKJ2bNiYZngYkWQr1Wbso iXmuYDAEB7h5zGf2rp8uxncrE0pYZxMVqYkcIjgNYFzx/Ua9uDbWdxjI6SOPAzJ34E9o xJHhLcKSwBvWWed/A1QdUT7768j4L6jEKSqTbD4Yep9vtVVjHXw/hfjl+vR/HpEhD20v slpqPsWBaDcYH9DjDP+bU8e9GwrfKmJ/gLi61CjzQ53WeidkICbAPg8Y99JsC1A2qgsc H/iQ== X-RZG-AUTH: ":OWANVUa4dPFUgKR/3dpvnYP0Np73amq+g13rqGzmt2bYDnKIKaws6YXTsc4=" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from oxapp01-01.back.ox.d0m.de by smtp-ox.front (RZmta 44.18 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id y08c83v4N12jF5v (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (curve X9_62_prime256v1 with 256 ECDH bits, eq. 3072 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Thu, 23 May 2019 03:02:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 03:02:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Ulrich Hecht To: Simon Horman , Wolfram Sang Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Niklas_S=C3=B6derlund?= , Sergei Shtylyov , linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, magnus.damm@gmail.com Message-ID: <591180619.231842.1558573365579@webmail.strato.com> In-Reply-To: <20190522115916.vlnbna2vxnf7zhod@verge.net.au> References: <1557328882-24307-1-git-send-email-uli+renesas@fpond.eu> <1f7be29e-c85a-d63d-c83f-357a76e8ca45@cogentembedded.com> <20190508165219.GA26309@bigcity.dyn.berto.se> <434070244.1141414.1557385064484@webmail.strato.com> <20190509101020.4ozvazptoy53gh55@verge.net.au> <344020243.1186987.1557415941124@webmail.strato.com> <20190513121807.cutayiact3qdbxt4@verge.net.au> <20190520120954.ffz2ius5nvojkxlh@katana> <20190522115916.vlnbna2vxnf7zhod@verge.net.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ravb: implement MTU change while device is up MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Medium X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.8.4-Rev58 X-Originating-IP: 85.212.212.17 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org > On May 22, 2019 at 1:59 PM Simon Horman wrote: > > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 02:09:54PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > How about the code below instead? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (netif_running(ndev)) > > > > > > > > ravb_close(ndev); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ndev->mtu = new_mtu; > > > > > > > > netdev_update_features(ndev); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a need to call netdev_update_features() even if the if is not > > > > > > > running? > > > > > > > > > > > > In my testing, it didn't seem so. > > > > > > > > > > That may be because your testing doesn't cover cases where it would make > > > > > any difference. > > > > > > > > Cases other than changing the MTU while the device is up? > > > > > > I was thinking of cases where listeners are registered for the > > > notifier that netdev_update_features() triggers. > > > > Where are we here? Is this a blocker? > > I don't think this is a blocker but I would lean towards leaving > netdev_update_features() in unless we are certain its not needed. > I have read through the code and have indeed not found any indication that netdev_update_features() or something equivalent is called implicitly when the device is closed and reopened. I'll send a v2. CU Uli