[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140314190242.4bba2b42@north>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:02:42 +0100
From: Jakub KiciĆski <moorray3@...pl>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/10] e1000e: add timeout for TX HW time
stamping work
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:48:37 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 18:34 +0100, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > Hardware may fail to report time stamp e.g.:
> > - when hardware time stamping is not enabled
> > - when time stamp is requested shortly after ifup
>
> trivia:
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> []
> > @@ -1155,6 +1155,12 @@ static void e1000e_tx_hwtstamp_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > skb_tstamp_tx(adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb, &shhwtstamps);
> > dev_kfree_skb_any(adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb);
> > adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb = NULL;
> > + } else if (time_after(jiffies, adapter->tx_hwtstamp_start
> > + + adapter->tx_timeout_factor * HZ)) {
> > + dev_kfree_skb_any(adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb);
> > + adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb = NULL;
> > + adapter->tx_hwtstamp_timeouts++;
> > + e_warn("clearing Tx timestamp hang");
>
> Missing \n termination
I copied that line from ixgbe and assumed that the magic macro adds
termination...
I see that igb and i40e also lack the \n on similar messages. Can I fix
them all in a single follow-up patch?
Thanks for catching this.
-- kuba
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists