[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190831194156.GC2647@lunn.ch>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 21:41:56 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
vedang.patel@...el.com, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
weifeng.voon@...el.com, jiri@...lanox.com, m-karicheri2@...com,
Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 00/15] tc-taprio offload for SJA1105 DSA
> I'm not 100% sure how taprio handles locking TBH, it just seems naive
> that HW callback will not need to sleep, so the kernel should make sure
> that callback can sleep. Otherwise we'll end up with 3/4 of drivers
> implementing some async work routine...
Hi Jakub
I suspect this is because until recently, all such devices were on a
PCI bus, for some other form of memory mapped device. It is only
recently with DSA becoming popular, that we need to handle devices on
the end of other sorts of bus, be is MDIO, SPI or i2c.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists