Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-176669-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 18:41:12 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Xiaolei Wang <xiaolei.wang@windriver.com>
Cc: alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, joabreu@synopsys.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
	mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, richardcochran@gmail.com,
	bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org, rohan.g.thomas@intel.com,
	rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk, fancer.lancer@gmail.com,
	ahalaney@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net PATCH v5 2/2] net: stmmac: move the EST structure to struct
 stmmac_priv
Message-ID: <20240511174112.GS2347895@kernel.org>
References: <20240510122155.3394723-1-xiaolei.wang@windriver.com>
 <20240510122155.3394723-3-xiaolei.wang@windriver.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240510122155.3394723-3-xiaolei.wang@windriver.com>

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 08:21:55PM +0800, Xiaolei Wang wrote:
> Move the EST structure to struct stmmac_priv, because the
> EST configs don't look like platform config, but EST is
> enabled in runtime with the settings retrieved for the TC
> TAPRIO feature also in runtime. So it's better to have the
> EST-data preserved in the driver private data instead of
> the platform data storage.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xiaolei Wang <xiaolei.wang@windriver.com>

Patch 1/2 of this series is a fix for net, with a Fixes tag.
IMHO, it looks good.

This patch, however, is a clean-up/enhancement.
It doesn't have a Fixes tag, which is good.
But I think it should be targeted at net-next
(once patch 1/2 has been accepted into net, and
net has been merged into net-next; also, given the timing,
once net-next reopens as It's likely to close rather soon
for the merge window).

Perhaps it is possible for the maintainers to pick up
patch 1/2, leaving this patch as follow-up.

The above notwithstanding, this patch looks good to me.

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

-- 
pw-bot: under-review