[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v4 1/2] igc: Limit netdev_tc calls to MQPRIO

[Simon Horman]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 02:04:21PM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> On Mon Apr 07 2025, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 02:52:38PM +0100, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> >> Limit netdev_tc calls to MQPRIO. Currently these calls are made in
> >> igc_tsn_enable_offload() and igc_tsn_disable_offload() which are used by
> >> TAPRIO and ETF as well. However, these are only required for MQPRIO.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt at linutronix.de>
> >
> > Hi Kurt,
> >
> > Thanks for the update. And I apologise that I now have question.
> >
> > I see that:
> >
> > * This patch moves logic from igc_tsn_disable_offload()
> >   and igc_tsn_enable_offload() to igc_tsn_enable_mqprio().
> >
> > * That both igc_tsn_disable_offload() and igc_tsn_enable_offload()
> >   are only called from igc_tsn_reset().
> >
> > * And that based on the description, this looks good for the case
> >   where igc_tsn_reset() is called from igc_tsn_offload_apply().
> >   This is because igc_tsn_offload_apply() is called from
> >   igc_tsn_enable_mqprio().
> >
> > All good so far.
> >
> > But my question is about the case where igc_tsn_reset() is called from
> > igc_reset(). Does the logic previously present in igc_tsn_enable_offload()
> > and igc_tsn_disable_offload() need to run in that case?
> 
> This patch moves the netdev_tc calls only. These do not have to run in
> this case. The hardware configuration is still applied in
> igc_tsn_enable_offload() and igc_tsn_disable_offload().

Thanks for clarifying, in that case this looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms at kernel.org>