[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aO-x-PNBhSxDf6_z@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 15:38:48 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
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>,
Egor Pomozov <epomozov@...vell.com>,
Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@...lsio.com>,
Dimitris Michailidis <dmichail@...gible.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
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/7] tsnep: convert to ndo_hwtstatmp API
On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 11:38:34AM +0100, Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
> On 15/10/2025 11:03, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 10:42:15PM +0000, Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
...
> > Hi Vadim,
> >
> > I'm probably missing something obvious, but it's not clear to me why
> > removing the inner switch statements above is ok. Or, perhaps more to the
> > point, it seems inconsistent with other patches in this series.
> >
> > OTOH, I do see why dropping the outer if conditions makes sense.
>
> I believe it's just a question for git diff. It replaces original
> tsnep_ptp_ioctl() function with get() callback. The only thing that new
> function does is copying actual config into reply.
>
> The switch statement goes to set() callback where the logic is kept as
> is. Original tsnep_ptp_ioctl() was serving both get and set operations,
> but the logic was applied to set operation only.
Thanks, silly me. I see that now.
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists