From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta-65-227.siemens.flowmailer.net (mta-65-227.siemens.flowmailer.net [185.136.65.227]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBE6F2417E3 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 12:25:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.136.65.227 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739881509; cv=none; b=Ytjk/swea9aSjNcKSo1IFqRJV9cmFuRXQB7OmLDRMCM+SW14QOipSio/16+PHJ+E21DYJNlCMfsoVM9xPntn/Upe4X9XAq2X5GgTPjUS0gYhkDu5MQdeq6/jm4qpI8W4WYBC951BxqSGtpCJwZKwSOtFmSkfoJUSZ1bwMLgV4R0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739881509; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YhCOzDgUX6Ndgo3HStvHEdN3KMsN1P0sllHKIUBhUIg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=sgLZYf2n4cyZhDu3Fu4O3GzdrPq9k/SD/RAJbSELHz279YyeFieqKtGxB2erc/DUlBet1wM7zcra34SGsT9M5RI+JKijPIDv8P+Ygf5QXuvUXs6YCQM+CXIVTXZ/71sEa0Q6WZL1vFu40ejVc2y6FehaLWh7evvoXqxMo4Z1mmQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=siemens.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rts-flowmailer.siemens.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=siemens.com header.i=diogo.ivo@siemens.com header.b=LYnOnoVz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.136.65.227 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=siemens.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rts-flowmailer.siemens.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=siemens.com header.i=diogo.ivo@siemens.com header.b="LYnOnoVz" Received: by mta-65-227.siemens.flowmailer.net with ESMTPSA id 20250218122503cc1b63842e14998ec4 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 13:25:03 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=fm2; d=siemens.com; i=diogo.ivo@siemens.com; h=Date:From:Subject:To:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:References:In-Reply-To; bh=G2Mmqb1Mk7iE4u/cA5jv4vjZ4vx0m26FAwwSyjZdlAQ=; b=LYnOnoVzgyvt12BzEBe4VCAtllZyzgApaONlStzl87LQ29SrPPal3so2Kv7HmCgq4Ld9S7 4JEn/o4WmOcWz+1JMdwklNEOfmMGoLAEo0dAXatefHPXGhGsjnkKkJwuGIsgGd55oQKOGXRC RQm6nZI5WWfQBog8RYiB8xQ8xaXWnR1aNkCA/4UKRLB7xWOVrYVerS8q3NSW93NU2X97sB9+ mcf1JZorJoE2dRh9W2+YgEea0iz23kjFC4C/IuOyhvRyKzjQxNQ8UBlqQDSaSBuVP+umSias BDTLqrMQfDqhz26QVFYf9tFU4sJqmeozUU5VMjiYWgCqPol3D0wtN8Kg==; Message-ID: Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 12:24:59 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/3] net: ti: icssg-prueth: Use page_pool API for RX buffer allocation To: "Malladi, Meghana" , Roger Quadros , danishanwar@ti.com, pabeni@redhat.com, kuba@kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, davem@davemloft.net, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com, krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, schnelle@linux.ibm.com, glaroque@baylibre.com, rdunlap@infradead.org, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, hawk@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org, srk@ti.com, Vignesh Raghavendra , diogo.ivo@siemens.com References: <20250210103352.541052-1-m-malladi@ti.com> <20250210103352.541052-2-m-malladi@ti.com> <152b032e-fcd9-4d49-8154-92a475c0670c@kernel.org> <615a2e1f-5ee5-4d80-a499-8ff06596a2fc@ti.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Diogo Ivo In-Reply-To: <615a2e1f-5ee5-4d80-a499-8ff06596a2fc@ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Flowmailer-Platform: Siemens Feedback-ID: 519:519-1328357:519-21489:flowmailer Hi Meghana, On 2/18/25 10:10 AM, Malladi, Meghana wrote: > On 2/12/2025 7:26 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: >> Can we get rid of SKB entirely from the management channel code? >> The packet received on this channel is never passed to user space so >> I don't see why SKB is required. >> > > Yes I do agree with you on the fact the SKB here is not passed to the > network stack, hence this is redundant. But honestly I am not sure how > that can be done, because the callers of this function access skb->data > from the skb which is returned and the same can't be done with page (how > to pass the same data using page?) > Also as you are aware we are not currently supporting SR1 devices > anymore, hence I don't have any SR1 devices handy to test these changes > and ensure nothing is broken if I remove SKB entirely. I have some SR1 devices available and would be happy to test these proposed changes in case they are feasible. Best regards, Diogo