[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230308183443.5284c51b@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 18:34:43 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Shay Agroskin <shayagr@...zon.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.com>,
"Machulsky, Zorik" <zorik@...zon.com>,
"Matushevsky, Alexander" <matua@...zon.com>,
Saeed Bshara <saeedb@...zon.com>,
"Wilson, Matt" <msw@...zon.com>,
"Liguori, Anthony" <aliguori@...zon.com>,
"Bshara, Nafea" <nafea@...zon.com>,
"Belgazal, Netanel" <netanel@...zon.com>,
"Saidi, Ali" <alisaidi@...zon.com>,
"Herrenschmidt, Benjamin" <benh@...zon.com>,
"Kiyanovski, Arthur" <akiyano@...zon.com>,
"Dagan, Noam" <ndagan@...zon.com>,
"Arinzon, David" <darinzon@...zon.com>,
"Itzko, Shahar" <itzko@...zon.com>,
"Abboud, Osama" <osamaabb@...zon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 net-next 0/5] Add tx push buf len param to
ethtool
On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 12:24:53 +0200 Shay Agroskin wrote:
> Changed since v2:
> - Added a check that the driver advertises support for TX push buffer
> instead of defaulting the response to 0.
> - Moved cosmetic changes to their own commits
> - Removed usage of gotos which goes against Linux coding style
> - Make ENA driver reject an attempt to configure TX push buffer when
> it's not supported (no LLQ is used)
LGTM!
Feel free to add my:
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
On patch one, because checkpatch will complain otherwise.
And repost as non-RFC.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists