Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 7/7] net: ravb: Allocate RX buffers via page pool

From: Simon Horman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 13:07:57 +0100

On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 09:02:51AM +0100, Paul Barker wrote:
> On 01/06/2024 11:13, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 04:03:39PM +0100, Paul Barker wrote:

...

> >> @@ -298,13 +269,14 @@ static void ravb_ring_free(struct net_device *ndev, int q)
> >>  		priv->tx_ring[q] = NULL;
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >> -	/* Free RX skb ringbuffer */
> >> -	if (priv->rx_skb[q]) {
> >> -		for (i = 0; i < priv->num_rx_ring[q]; i++)
> >> -			dev_kfree_skb(priv->rx_skb[q][i]);
> >> +	/* Free RX buffers */
> >> +	for (i = 0; i < priv->num_rx_ring[q]; i++) {
> >> +		if (priv->rx_buffers[q][i].page)
> >> +			page_pool_put_page(priv->rx_pool[q], priv->rx_buffers[q][i].page, 0, true);
> > 
> > nit: Networking still prefers code to be 80 columns wide or less.
> >      It looks like that can be trivially achieved here.
> > 
> >      Flagged by checkpatch.pl --max-line-length=80
> 
> Sergey has asked me to wrap to 100 cols [1]. I can only find a reference
> to 80 in the docs though [2], so I guess you may be right.
> 
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email-masked]/
> [2]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html

Hi Paul,

If Sergey prefers 100 then I won't argue :)

FWIIW, think what has happened here relates to the Kernel, at some point,
going from 80 to 100 columns as the preferred maximum width, while Networking
stuck with 80.

...