netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/15] tc-taprio offload for SJA1105 DSA

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 10 Sep 2019 02:46:02 +0100
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Joergen Andreasen <joergen.andreasen@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, vivien.didelot@...il.com,
        vinicius.gomes@...el.com, vedang.patel@...el.com,
        richardcochran@...il.com, weifeng.voon@...el.com,
        jiri@...lanox.com, m-karicheri2@...com, Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com,
        ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org, jhs@...atatu.com,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, kurt.kanzenbach@...utronix.de,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/15] tc-taprio offload for SJA1105 DSA

Hi Andrew, Joergen, Richard,

On 09/09/2019, Joergen Andreasen <joergen.andreasen@...rochip.com> wrote:
> The 09/08/2019 22:42, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 12:07:27PM +0100, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>> > I think Richard has been there when the taprio, etf qdiscs, SO_TXTIME
>> > were first defined and developed:
>> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/808504/
>> > I expect he is capable of delivering a competent review of the entire
>> > series, possibly way more competent than my patch set itself.
>> >
>> > The reason why I'm not splitting it up is because I lose around 10 ns
>> > of synchronization offset when using the hardware-corrected PTPCLKVAL
>> > clock for timestamping rather than the PTPTSCLK free-running counter.
>>
>> Hi Vladimir
>>
>> I'm not suggesting anything is wrong with your concept, when i say
>> split it up. It is more than when somebody sees 15 patches, they
>> decide they don't have the time at the moment, and put it off until
>> later. And often later never happens. If however they see a smaller
>> number of patches, they think that yes they have time now, and do the
>> review.
>>
>> So if you are struggling to get something reviewed, make it more
>> appealing for the reviewer. Salami tactics.
>>
>>     Andrew
>
> I vote for splitting it up.
> I don't know enough about PTP and taprio/qdisc to review the entire series
> but the interface presented in patch 09/15 fits well with our future TSN
> switches.
>
> Joergen Andreasen, Microchip
>

Thanks for the feedback. I split the PTP portion that is loosely
coupled (patches 01-07) into a different series. The rest is qdisc
stuff and hardware implementation details. They belong together
because it would be otherwise strange to provide an interface with no
user. You can still review only the patches you are interested in,
however.

Thanks,
-Vladimir