[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8f039029-74ee-a30f-ae6e-886b6220f017@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 17:26:47 -0800
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Maxim Kochetkov <fido_max@...ox.ru>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 08/12] net: dsa: tag_ocelot: single out
PTP-related transmit tag processing
On 2/13/2021 14:37, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
>
> There is one place where we cannot avoid accessing driver data, and that
> is 2-step PTP TX timestamping, since the switch wants us to provide a
> timestamp request ID through the injection header, which naturally must
> come from a sequence number kept by the driver (it is generated by the
> .port_txtstamp method prior to the tagger's xmit).
>
> However, since other drivers like dsa_loop do not claim PTP support
> anyway, the DSA_SKB_CB(skb)->clone will always be NULL anyway, so if we
> move all PTP-related dereferences of struct ocelot and struct ocelot_port
> into a separate function, we can effectively ensure that this is dead
> code when the ocelot tagger is attached to non-ocelot switches, and the
> stateful portion of the tagger is more self-contained.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists