[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230614091928.5oi5r7sw7tac27lt@soft-dev3-1>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 11:19:28 +0200
From: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<andrew@...n.ch>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
<pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] net: micrel: Schedule work to read
seconds for lan8841
The 06/13/2023 21:49, Richard Cochran wrote:
Hi Richard,
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:45:26AM +0200, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> > @@ -3840,6 +3847,12 @@ static void lan8841_ptp_enable_processing(struct kszphy_ptp_priv *ptp_priv,
> > LAN8841_PTP_INSERT_TS_32BIT,
> > LAN8841_PTP_INSERT_TS_EN |
> > LAN8841_PTP_INSERT_TS_32BIT);
> > +
> > + /* Schedule the work to read the seconds, which will be used in
> > + * the received timestamp
> > + */
> > + schedule_delayed_work(&ptp_priv->seconds_work,
> > + nsecs_to_jiffies(LAN8841_GET_SEC_LTC_DELAY));
>
> Why not do this in the PTP kworker thread?
I presume you mean the work of reading the second part to be done in the
PTP kworker thread and not scheduling the seconds_work.
Because then it make sense to me and I think is a great idea.
>
> The thread's scheduling can be easily tuned with chrt to give it
> appropriate priority, but work can't.
Nice, I didn't know about this.
>
> Also, If you have seconds thread, then you don't have to defer the
> received frames.
Exactly, the PTP kworker thread will cache the seconds value while
lan8841_rxtstamp will read this value, so no need to defer these frames.
In this way I can get rid of seconds_work.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
--
/Horatiu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists