lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 26 Mar 2020 09:25:11 +0000
From:   "Y.b. Lu" <yangbo.lu@....com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins

Hi Richard,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 9:16 PM
> To: Y.b. Lu <yangbo.lu@....com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; David S . Miller
> <davem@...emloft.net>; Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>;
> Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>; Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>;
> Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>; Florian Fainelli
> <f.fainelli@...il.com>; Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>;
> Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins
> 
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 06:37:26PM +0800, Yangbo Lu wrote:
> > Support 4 programmable pins for only one function periodic
> > signal for now.
> 
> For now?

Yes. The pin on Ocelot/Felix supports both PTP_PF_PEROUT and PTP_PF_EXTTS functions.
But the PTP_PF_EXTTS function should be implemented separately in Ocelot and Felix since hardware interrupt implementation is different on them.
I am responsible for Felix. However I am facing some issue on PTP_PF_EXTTS function on hardware. It may take a long time to discuss internally.

Thanks.

> 
> > +static int ocelot_ptp_verify(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp, unsigned int pin,
> > +			     enum ptp_pin_function func, unsigned int chan)
> > +{
> > +	switch (func) {
> > +	case PTP_PF_NONE:
> > +	case PTP_PF_PEROUT:
> > +		break;
> 
> If the functions cannot be changed, then supporting the
> PTP_PIN_SETFUNC ioctl does not make sense!

Did you mean the dead lock issue? Or you thought the pin supported only PTP_PF_PEROUT function in hardware?

> 
> > +	case PTP_PF_EXTTS:
> > +	case PTP_PF_PHYSYNC:
> > +		return -1;
> > +	}
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ