[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190831144732.GA1692@localhost>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 07:47:32 -0700
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Christopher S Hall <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] PTP: add support for one-shot output
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 11:00:20AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >> @@ -177,9 +177,8 @@ long ptp_ioctl(struct posix_clock *pc, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> >> err = -EFAULT;
> >> break;
> >> }
> >> - if ((req.perout.flags || req.perout.rsv[0] || req.perout.rsv[1]
> >> - || req.perout.rsv[2] || req.perout.rsv[3])
> >> - && cmd == PTP_PEROUT_REQUEST2) {
> >> + if ((req.perout.rsv[0] || req.perout.rsv[1] || req.perout.rsv[2]
> >> + || req.perout.rsv[3]) && cmd == PTP_PEROUT_REQUEST2) {
> >
> > Please check that the reserved bits of req.perout.flags, namely
> > ~PTP_PEROUT_ONE_SHOT, are clear.
>
> Actually, we should check more. PEROUT_FEATURE_ENABLE is still valid
> here, right? So are RISING and FALLING edges, no?
No. The ptp_extts_request.flags are indeed defined:
struct ptp_extts_request {
...
unsigned int flags; /* Bit field for PTP_xxx flags. */
...
};
But the ptp_perout_request.flags are reserved:
struct ptp_perout_request {
...
unsigned int flags; /* Reserved for future use. */
...
};
For this ioctl, the test for enable/disable is
ptp_perout_request.period is zero:
enable = req.perout.period.sec || req.perout.period.nsec;
err = ops->enable(ops, &req, enable);
The usage pattern here is taken from timer_settime(2).
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists