On 05/11/2025 18:46, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 13:33:08 +0000 Vadim Fedorenko wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

   	bp->hwtstamp_ioctl_called = true;
-	bp->tx_type = config.tx_type;
-	bp->rx_filter = config.rx_filter;
+	bp->tx_type = config->tx_type;
+	bp->rx_filter = config->rx_filter;
   
   	rc = bnx2x_configure_ptp_filters(bp);

bnx2x_configure_ptp_filters() may return -ERANGE if settings were not applied.
This may already be semi-broken but with the get in place we will make
it even worse.

Ah, you mean in case of -ERANGE we will still have new filter
configuration set in bp object? It's easy to fix, but it will be
some kind of change of behavior. If it's acceptable, I'm happy to send
v3 of the patchset.>

True, you can probably make the -ERANGE handling a separate patch
for ultimate clarity.

Well, looks like there is a special guard hwtstamp_ioctl_called
implemented, so it looks safe to move the check. I've sent these patches 
as a separate patchset.