[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BL0PR11MB29130F8A2E9D28BC032995A0E7E42@BL0PR11MB2913.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 15:04:17 +0000
From: <Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com>
To: <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <andrew@...n.ch>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
<f.fainelli@...il.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<olteanv@...il.com>, <Arun.Ramadoss@...rochip.com>, <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <dsahern@...nel.org>, <horms@...nel.org>,
<willemb@...gle.com>, <san@...v.dk>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v7 02/12] net: dsa: microchip: add IPV
information support
Hi Oleksij,
> Hi Woojung,
>
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 08:43:48PM +0000, Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com wrote:
> > Hi Oleksij,
> >
> > Thanks for the patch and sorry about late comment on this.
> >
> > I have a comment on the name of IPV (Internal Priority Value)
> > IPV is added and used term in 802.1Qci PSFP
> > (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8064221) and, merged into 802.1Q
> (from 802.1Q-2018)
> > for another functions.
> >
> > Even it does similar operation holding temporal priority value internally
> (as it is named),
> > because KSZ datasheet doesn't use the term of IPV (Internal Priority Value)
> and
> > avoiding any confusion later when PSFP is in the Linux world,
> > I would like to recommend a different name such as IPM (Internal Priority
> Mapping) than IPV.
> >
> > How do you think?
>
> Ok.
>
> Do IPV in LAN9372 datasheet means, IPV 802.1Qci PSFP or IPM?
>
IPV in LAN9372 is 802.1Qci PSFP. It has TSN features including 802.1Qci.
Thanks.
Woojung
Powered by blists - more mailing lists