[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4e0f6651b9206ff8ef6d25d729d45d24@walle.cc>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 21:48:48 +0100
From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
Köry Maincent
<kory.maincent@...tlin.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>,
Jie Wang <wangjie125@...wei.com>,
Oleksij Rempel <linux@...pel-privat.de>,
Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
Marco Bonelli <marco@...eim.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] net: Let the active time stamping layer be
selectable.
Am 2023-03-10 17:06, schrieb Vladimir Oltean:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 02:34:07PM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
>> Yeah, but my problem right now is, that if this discussion won't find
>> any good solution, the lan8814 phy timestamping will find it's way
>> into an official kernel and then it is really hard to undo things.
>>
>> So, I'd really prefer to *first* have a discussion how to proceed
>> with the PHY timestamping and then add the lan8814 support, so
>> existing boards don't show a regressions.
>
> You don't mean LAN8814 but LAN8841, no?
Ohh, I'm stupid. No, I mean the LAN8814 (Quad PHY).
> For the former, PTP support was added in commit ece19502834d ("net:
> phy:
> micrel: 1588 support for LAN8814 phy") - first present in v5.18.
Yeah and I remember.. there was some kind of issue with the PHY
latencies. Ok, looks like I'm screwed then. I wonder how Microchip
is doing it, because our board is almost an identical copy of the
reference system.
> For the latter, it was commit cafc3662ee3f ("net: micrel: Add PHC
> support for lan8841"), and this one indeed is in the v6.3 release
> candidates.
>
> Assuming you can prove a regression, how about adding the PHY driver
> whitelist *without* the lan8841 as a patch to net.git? (blaming commit
> cafc3662ee3f ("net: micrel: Add PHC support for lan8841")).
>
> Doing this will effectively deactivate lan8841 PHY timestamping without
> reverting the code. Then, this PHY timestamping support could be
> activated back in net-next, based on some sort of explicit UAPI call.
Sorry for the noise and any inconvenience,
-michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists