[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb93e416-1a6c-4c3c-9621-03deb8bc34aa@linux.dev>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 12:33:15 +0100
From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....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>,
Igor Russkikh <irusskikh@...vell.com>, Egor Pomozov <epomozov@...vell.com>,
Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@...lsio.com>,
Dimitris Michailidis <dmichail@...gible.com>,
Jian Shen <shenjian15@...wei.com>, Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jijie Shao <shaojijie@...wei.com>, Sunil Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>,
Geetha sowjanya <gakula@...vell.com>, Subbaraya Sundeep
<sbhatta@...vell.com>, Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@...vell.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@....com>,
Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund@...natech.se>,
Paul Barker <paul@...rker.dev>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
MD Danish Anwar <danishanwar@...com>, Roger Quadros <rogerq@...nel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] net: hns3: add hwtstamp_get/hwtstamp_set
ops
On 14/10/2025 12:26, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 04:37:48PM +0000, Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
>> And .ndo_hwtstamp_get()/.ndo_hwtstamp_set() callbacks to HNS3 framework
>> to support HW timestamp configuration via netlink.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
>
> Hi Vadim,
>
> This patch adds warnings about the functions it adds being unused.
>
> I would suggest addressing this by simply squashing this and the following
> patch, which uses these new functions, into one patch. I think the
> resulting patch would still be small, internally consistent, and easy
> enough to review.
>
Hi Simon!
Thanks for the review. I was thinking about it while writing the code,
but thought it would be clearer to have it split. Apparently, I forgot
about warnings in this case, which is definitely an issue here.
Thanks for flagging, I'll merge these 2 patches in the next version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists