[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9febcd8e-bc03-8ad9-3f22-ffdeeb92e512@enneenne.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 09:59:38 +0100
From: Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Alex Komrakov <alexander.komrakov@...adcom.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] pps: Add elapsed realtime timestamping
On 17/03/23 18:06, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 05:34:28PM +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
>> On 17/03/23 15:22, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 03:04:31PM +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
>>>> On 17/03/23 10:51, Alex Komrakov wrote:
>>>>>> + if (!(pps->info.mode & PPS_CAPTURECLEAR))
>>>>>> + return 0; Why are you not returning an error?
>>>>> [AK] I used the style in this file sysfs.c.
>>>>> assert_show() and clear_show() have the same condition.
>>>>> When '& PPS_CAPTURECLEAR' -- 0 means no interrupt asserted and it is not error
>>>>> Probably Rodolfo can get more info why return 0
>>>>
>>>> It's just as Alex said, if the PPS source has no PPS_CAPTUREASSERT or
>>>> PPS_CAPTURECLEAR mode it should not print ASSERT and CLEAR info.
>>>
>>> But shouldn't you return an error instead of an empty string?
>>
>> This is not an error... it's just a disabled capability. :)
>
> Then maybe return "0" or something like that?
Yes, it could be a valid solution.
>>>>> And why are these sysfs files even present if the mode is not set
>>>>> properly? Can the mode be set while the device is attached or is this
>>>>> only defined at probe time? If at probe time, just never create these
>>>>> files.
>>>>> [AK] we can understand mode is set when interrupts asserted and
>>>>> file assert_elapsed will be updated.
>>>>
>>>> PPS source's "mode bits" can be set at runtime via PPS_SETPARAMS.
>>>
>>> Ok, that's good to know. But I think the error return value is a better
>>> indication that something went wrong here and this attribute does not
>>> work for this device at this point in time.
>>
>> I see... however I suppose several code relays on this behavior.
>
> If that's the case, then you are right, you can't change it, and I'll
> stop complaining here :)
>
> What tools use these sysfs files?
Mainly are debugging tools via scripts. Normal usage should be via C API.
> How did you test your changes?
As above, I use scripts whose get access to sysfs to test a PPS source
functionality. Regarding the C API I use the pps-tools:
https://github.com/redlab-i/pps-tools
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: giometti@...eenne.com
Linux Device Driver giometti@...ux.it
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Powered by blists - more mailing lists