[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230511123245.rs5gskwukood3ger@skbuf>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 15:32:45 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To: Maxim Georgiev <glipus@...il.com>
Cc: kory.maincent@...tlin.com, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev,
richardcochran@...il.com, gerhard@...leder-embedded.com,
liuhangbin@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 1/5] net: Add NDOs for hardware timestamp
get/set
On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 10:31:46PM -0600, Maxim Georgiev wrote:
> struct net_device_ops {
> int (*ndo_init)(struct net_device *dev);
> @@ -1649,6 +1659,12 @@ struct net_device_ops {
> ktime_t (*ndo_get_tstamp)(struct net_device *dev,
> const struct skb_shared_hwtstamps *hwtstamps,
> bool cycles);
> + int (*ndo_hwtstamp_get)(struct net_device *dev,
> + struct kernel_hwtstamp_config *kernel_config,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
I'm not sure it is necessary to pass an extack to "get". That should
only give a more detailed reason if the driver refuses something.
For that matter, now that ndo_hwtstamp_get() should no longer be
concerned with the copy_to_user(), I'm not even sure that it should
return int at all, and not void. The transition is going to be slightly
problematic though, with the generic_hwtstamp_get_lower() necessarily
still calling dev_eth_ioctl() -> copy_to_user(), so we probably can't
make it void just now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists