From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B19C4361B for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 00:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23DBD23A04 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 00:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728084AbgLHAYo (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:24:44 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:2884 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726184AbgLHAYo (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:24:44 -0500 IronPort-SDR: f329wRf7mhGceRp4WMPq0ahwGcqZk5bROScxaXD4HcmEyIWoWtSWSNTVIzCQmHLxBcXpa/BIZL GNTnXCPW/Dyg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9828"; a="170295288" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,401,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="170295288" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Dec 2020 16:24:03 -0800 IronPort-SDR: FXZs/AawAe8wQxN5ggxkU3QHCStmZCMzejW+1SZPLuF9dm36FU1ukokTFak3LtgaZX7JZodDXs 6mV532PeRaQw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,401,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="317457183" Received: from seherahx-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO ellie) ([10.209.17.196]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Dec 2020 16:24:02 -0800 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us, m-karicheri2@ti.com, vladimir.oltean@nxp.com, Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com, po.liu@nxp.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/9] ethtool: Add support for configuring frame preemption In-Reply-To: <20201207152126.6f3d1808@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <20201202045325.3254757-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201202045325.3254757-2-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201205094325.790b187f@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <87eek11d23.fsf@intel.com> <20201207152126.6f3d1808@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 16:24:02 -0800 Message-ID: <87blf5ywkd.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Mon, 07 Dec 2020 14:11:48 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: >> Jakub Kicinski writes: >> >> + * @min_frag_size_mult: Minimum size for all non-final fragment size, >> >> + * expressed in terms of X in '(1 + X)*64 + 4' >> > >> > Is this way of expressing the min frag size from the standard? >> > >> >> The standard has this: "A 2-bit integer value indicating, in units of 64 >> octets, the minimum number of octets over 64 octets required in >> non-final fragments by the receiver" from IEEE 802.3br-2016, Table >> 79-7a. > > Thanks! Let's drop the _mult suffix and add a mention of this > controlling the addFragSize variable from the standard. Perhaps > it should in fact be called add_frag_size (with an explanation > that the "additional" means "above the 64B" which are required in > Ethernet, and which are accounted for by the "1" in the 1 + X > formula)? Sounds good :-) Will add a comment with the standard reference and change the name to 'add_frag_size'. Cheers, -- Vinicius From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 16:24:02 -0800 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v1 1/9] ethtool: Add support for configuring frame preemption In-Reply-To: <20201207152126.6f3d1808@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <20201202045325.3254757-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201202045325.3254757-2-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201205094325.790b187f@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> <87eek11d23.fsf@intel.com> <20201207152126.6f3d1808@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> Message-ID: <87blf5ywkd.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Mon, 07 Dec 2020 14:11:48 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: >> Jakub Kicinski writes: >> >> + * @min_frag_size_mult: Minimum size for all non-final fragment size, >> >> + * expressed in terms of X in '(1 + X)*64 + 4' >> > >> > Is this way of expressing the min frag size from the standard? >> > >> >> The standard has this: "A 2-bit integer value indicating, in units of 64 >> octets, the minimum number of octets over 64 octets required in >> non-final fragments by the receiver" from IEEE 802.3br-2016, Table >> 79-7a. > > Thanks! Let's drop the _mult suffix and add a mention of this > controlling the addFragSize variable from the standard. Perhaps > it should in fact be called add_frag_size (with an explanation > that the "additional" means "above the 64B" which are required in > Ethernet, and which are accounted for by the "1" in the 1 + X > formula)? Sounds good :-) Will add a comment with the standard reference and change the name to 'add_frag_size'. Cheers, -- Vinicius