Hi Stephen,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> > Sent: 2020年5月6日 23:22 > To: Po Liu <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; Claudiu Manoil > <[email protected]>; Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]>; > Alexandru Marginean <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [v4,iproute2-next 1/2] iproute2-next:tc:action: add a > gate control action > On Wed, 6 May 2020 16:40:19 +0800 > Po Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > } else if (matches(*argv, "base-time") == 0) { > > + NEXT_ARG(); > > + if (get_u64(&base_time, *argv, 10)) { > > + invalidarg = "base-time"; > > + goto err_arg; > > + } > > + } else if (matches(*argv, "cycle-time") == 0) { > > + NEXT_ARG(); > > + if (get_u64(&cycle_time, *argv, 10)) { > > + invalidarg = "cycle-time"; > > + goto err_arg; > > + } > > + } else if (matches(*argv, "cycle-time-ext") == 0) { > > + NEXT_ARG(); > > + if (get_u64(&cycle_time_ext, *argv, 10)) { > > + invalidarg = "cycle-time-ext"; > > + goto err_arg; > > + } > > Could all these time values use existing TC helper routines? I agree to keep the tc routines input. The names of timer input and type is more reference the taprio input. > See get_time(). The way you have it makes sense for hardware but stands > out versus the rest of tc. > > It maybe that the kernel UAPI is wrong, and should be using same time > units as rest of tc. Forgot to review that part of the patch. I would also sync with kernel UAPI if needed. Br, Po Liu
