Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 27 Jun 2022 11:40:31 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Cc:     Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Xiaoliang Yang <xiaoliang.yang_1@nxp.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        "UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>,
        Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com>,
        Maxim Kochetkov <fido_max@inbox.ru>,
        Colin Foster <colin.foster@in-advantage.com>,
        Richie Pearn <richard.pearn@nxp.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] time64.h: define PSEC_PER_NSEC and use it
 in tc-taprio
Message-ID: <20220627114031.77c5a6e6@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220627100614.s2arerirkmcnd37z@skbuf>
References: <20220626120505.2369600-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
        <20220626120505.2369600-2-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
        <5db4e640-8165-d7bf-c6b6-192ea7edfafd@arm.com>
        <20220627085101.jw55y3fakqcw7zgi@skbuf>
        <4e4b9e1a-778e-9ca1-5c15-65e45a532790@arm.com>
        <20220627100614.s2arerirkmcnd37z@skbuf>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:06:15 +0000 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > I do not have a strong opinion on where to put it. But I think that if you put a
> > section above TIME64_MAX should work.  
> 
> @networking people: do you mind if in v2 I move this patch to the end,
> hardcode 1000 in the current DSA patch 4/4, and then replace it afterwards
> with PSEC_PER_NSEC, together with tc-taprio? I'd like to leave the code
> in a clean state, but remember this is also a patch that fixes a
> functional issue, even if on net-next, so one dependency less can't
> hurt, for those who'll want to backport.

Makes sense.