[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211106001804.GA24062@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2021 17:18:04 -0700
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Martin Kaistra <martin.kaistra@...utronix.de>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] net: dsa: b53: Expose PTP timestamping ioctls to
userspace
On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 04:28:33PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> What is the expected convention exactly? There are other drivers that
> downgrade the user application's request to what they support, and at
> least ptp4l does not error out, it just prints a warning.
Drivers may upgrade, but they may not downgrade.
Which drivers downgrade? We need to fix those buggy drivers.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists