linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next V3] dt-bindings: net: ethernet-controller: Add ptp-hardware-clock

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]

Message-ID: <20230313153532.2ed45ddf@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 13 Mar 2023 15:35:32 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc:     Sarath Babu Naidu Gaddam <sarath.babu.naidu.gaddam@....com>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        <richardcochran@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <yangbo.lu@....com>, <radhey.shyam.pandey@....com>,
        <anirudha.sarangi@....com>, <harini.katakam@....com>, <git@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3] dt-bindings: net: ethernet-controller: Add
 ptp-hardware-clock

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 11:14:08 +0530 Sarath Babu Naidu Gaddam wrote:
> There is currently no standard property to pass PTP device index
> information to ethernet driver when they are independent.
> 
> ptp-hardware-clock property will contain phandle to PTP clock node.
> 
> Its a generic (optional) property name to link to PTP phandle to
> Ethernet node. Any future or current ethernet drivers that need
> a reference to the PHC used on their system can simply use this
> generic property name instead of using custom property
> implementation in their device tree nodes."
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sarath Babu Naidu Gaddam <sarath.babu.naidu.gaddam@....com>
> Acked-by: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>

Rob, Krzysztof, any thoughts on this one?
Looks like the v2 discussion was a bit inconclusive.