[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251031164208.7917f929@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 16:42:08 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky
<leon@...nel.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Mark Bloch
<mbloch@...dia.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann
<daniel@...earbox.net>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, "John
Fastabend" <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Richard Cochran
<richardcochran@...il.com>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>, Carolina Jubran
<cjubran@...dia.com>, Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] net/mlx5e: Convert to new hwtstamp_get/set
interface
On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 12:25:10 +0200 Tariq Toukan wrote:
> - err = mlx5e_hwstamp_config_no_ptp_rx(priv,
> - config.rx_filter != HWTSTAMP_FILTER_NONE);
> + err = mlx5e_hwstamp_config_no_ptp_rx(
> + priv, config->rx_filter != HWTSTAMP_FILTER_NONE);
FWIW I think this formatting is even worse than going over 80 :(
Powered by blists - more mailing lists