netdev - Re: [PATCH iwl-next v3] igc: Change Tx mode for MQPRIO offloading

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5ebcf4b7-ed17-4cd6-ba1d-c35562a32899@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:03:57 +0800
From: "Abdul Rahim, Faizal" <faizal.abdul.rahim@...ux.intel.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
 Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v3] igc: Change Tx mode for MQPRIO offloading

On 7/3/2025 11:02 pm, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 10:16:33AM +0100, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc.h
>> index cd1d7b6c1782352094f6867a31b6958c929bbbf4..16d85bdf55a7e9c412c47acf727bca6bc7154c61 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc.h
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc.h
>> @@ -388,11 +388,9 @@ extern char igc_driver_name[];
>>   #define IGC_FLAG_RX_LEGACY		BIT(16)
>>   #define IGC_FLAG_TSN_QBV_ENABLED	BIT(17)
>>   #define IGC_FLAG_TSN_QAV_ENABLED	BIT(18)
>> -#define IGC_FLAG_TSN_LEGACY_ENABLED	BIT(19)
>>   
>>   #define IGC_FLAG_TSN_ANY_ENABLED				\
>> -	(IGC_FLAG_TSN_QBV_ENABLED | IGC_FLAG_TSN_QAV_ENABLED |	\
>> -	 IGC_FLAG_TSN_LEGACY_ENABLED)
>> +	(IGC_FLAG_TSN_QBV_ENABLED | IGC_FLAG_TSN_QAV_ENABLED)
> 
> How do you and Faizal plan to serialize your changes on these flags?
> You delete IGC_FLAG_TSN_LEGACY_ENABLED and he adds
> IGC_FLAG_TSN_PREEMPT_ENABLED.

 From what I’ve experienced before, when there’s a conflict like this, the 
Intel maintainer handles it and gets both authors to review the resolution 
(this has happened to both of us before) before they proceed to submit the 
patch.

But if one patch gets merged first, the other person can just rebase and 
submit a new version ?