[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZW8HqIgkRwsicjNR@nanopsycho>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 12:21:12 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: core: synchronize link-watch when carrier is
queried
Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 11:28:32AM CET, johannes@...solutions.net wrote:
>On Tue, 2023-12-05 at 09:32 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >
>> > + /* Synchronize the carrier state so we don't report a state
>> > + * that we're not actually going to honour immediately; if
>> > + * the driver just did a carrier off->on transition, we can
>> > + * only TX if link watch work has run, but without this we'd
>> > + * already report carrier on, even if it doesn't work yet.
>> > + */
>>
>> This comment is a bit harder to understand for me, but I eventually did
>> get it :)
>
>Do you want to propose different wording with your understanding? :)
Would not be better I'm afraid :)
>
>> Patch looks fine to me.
>
>Thanks :)
>
>johannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists