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=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 D5E6EC433E1 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:05:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2D3C20717 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:05:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="Y0YWhGie" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730188AbgGUUFz (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:05:55 -0400 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]:46098 "EHLO fllv0015.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726029AbgGUUFz (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:05:55 -0400 Received: from lelv0265.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.224]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 06LK5pYT069564; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:05:51 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1595361951; bh=tpY2ih59KGYmERp97fsLjRsOU32Csq0d+LombzlNmu0=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Y0YWhGiePRuZlztzOzkh/gOcgJjWO/rCWI2DVgfAZoFBmLpPo5zcc2OOeDgtj7jDh 3CNISFf6O1jT2TtC7ezgHi9bcw2GLkmS5Y+U3tE9E9QRYVCov1l5PfOt+bFKjsV87m Kf6fMIXsPyzZGMqppN2nk4VJ20Dhtm+2Lj2TWb1M= Received: from DFLE114.ent.ti.com (dfle114.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.35]) by lelv0265.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 06LK5pHF091583 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:05:51 -0500 Received: from DFLE107.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.28) by DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:05:51 -0500 Received: from fllv0039.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.19) by DFLE107.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:05:51 -0500 Received: from [10.250.100.73] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0039.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 06LK5nOv023819; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:05:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: ti: add NETIF_F_HW_TC hw feature flag for taprio offload To: David Miller CC: , , , , References: <20200717121932.26649-1-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <20200717.184701.2071890437316814619.davem@davemloft.net> From: Grygorii Strashko Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:05:48 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200717.184701.2071890437316814619.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org hi David, On 18/07/2020 04:47, David Miller wrote: > From: Grygorii Strashko > Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 15:19:32 +0300 > >> From: Murali Karicheri >> >> Currently drive supports taprio offload which is a tc feature offloaded >> to cpsw hardware. So driver has to set the hw feature flag, NETIF_F_HW_TC >> in the net device to be compliant. This patch adds the flag. >> >> Fixes: 8127224c2708 ("ethernet: ti: am65-cpsw-qos: add TAPRIO offload support") >> Signed-off-by: Murali Karicheri >> Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko > > How was the commit adding TAPRIO support even tested since without the > NETIF_F_HW_TC bit set tc_can_offload() always returns false? > The sch_taprio doesn't check for NETIF_F_HW_TC (no calls of tc_can_offload()). It only checks for !ndo_setup_tc(). Therefore our basic offload tests are working. It's not critical patch. -- Best regards, grygorii