netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 iwl-next 1/9] ice: use ice_pf_src_tmr_owned where available

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 17:56:25 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacinski@...el.com>,
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 iwl-next 1/9] ice: use
 ice_pf_src_tmr_owned where available

On 8/22/23 17:48, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 04:44:29PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
>> On 8/22/23 16:13, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 09:02:11AM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 02:52:49PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 04:17:38PM +0200, Karol Kolacinski wrote:
>>>>>> The ice_pf_src_tmr_owned() macro exists to check the function capability
>>>>>> bit indicating if the current function owns the PTP hardware clock.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is first patch in the series, but I can't find mentioned macro.
>>>>> My net-next is based on 5b0a1414e0b0 ("Merge branch 'smc-features'")
>>>>> ➜  kernel git:(net-next) git grep ice_pf_src_tmr_owned
>>>>> shows nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> On which branch is it based?
>>>>
>>>> Hi Leon,
>>>>
>>>> My assumption is that it is based on the dev-queue branch of
>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tnguy/next-queue.git
>>>
>>> So should netdev readers review it or wait till Intel folks perform
>>> first pass on it?
>>
>> Most of the time Intel folks would be first to review, if only because of
>> our pre-IWL processes or pure familiarity/interest in given piece.
>>
>> For this particular series, it is about right "codewise" since v1, so you
>> are welcome for an insightful look at v3
>> (I didn't provided my RBs so far because of "metadata" issues :),
>> will take a fresh look, but you don't need to wait).
>>
>>
>> General idea for CC'ing netdev for IWL-targeted patches is to have open
>> develompent process.
>> Quality should be already as for netdev posting.
>> Our VAL picks up patches for testing from here when Tony marks them so.
>>
>> That's what I could say for review process.
>>
>> "Maintainers stuff", I *guess*, is:
>> after review&test Tony Requests netdev Maintainers to Pull
>> (and throttles outgoing stuff by doing so to pace agreed upon).
>> At that stage is a last moment for (late?) review, welcomed as always.
> 
> It means that we (netdev@... ) will see "same" patches twice, am I right?

That's true.

> 
> Thanks
> 
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Intel-wired-lan mailing list
>>> Intel-wired-lan@...osl.org
>>> https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan
>>
>>

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