linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] net: stmmac: xgmac: EST interrupts handling

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: <20231005121441.22916-1-rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
Date:   Thu,  5 Oct 2023 20:14:41 +0800
From:   Rohan G Thomas <rohan.g.thomas@...el.com>
To:     kuba@...nel.org
Cc:     alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        edumazet@...gle.com, fancer.lancer@...il.com, joabreu@...opsys.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, rohan.g.thomas@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] net: stmmac: xgmac: EST interrupts handling

On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 09:26:13 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 14:12:15 +0300 Serge Semin wrote:
> > If I didn't miss some details after that we'll have a common EST
> > module utilized for both DW QoS Eth and DW XGMAC IP-cores.
> 
> So the question now is whether we want Rohan to do this conversion _first_,
> in DW QoS 5, and then add xgmac part. Or the patch should go in as is and
> you'll follow up with the conversion?

Hi Jakub, Serge,

If agreed, this commit can go in. I can submit another patch with the
refactoring suggested by Serge.

Again, thanks Serge for the prompt response. Regarding the below point in your
earlier response,

> > 2. PTP time offset setup performed by means of the
> > MTL_EST_CONTROL.PTOV field. DW QoS Eth v5.x HW manual claims it's "The
> > value of PTP Clock period multiplied by 6 in nanoseconds." So either Jose got
> > mistaken by using _9_ for DW XGMAC v3.x or the DW XGMAC indeed is
> > different in that aspect.

This is a little confusing...
I referred databooks for DW QoS Eth v5.30a and DW XGMAC v3.10a. In both this is
mentioned as "The value of PTP Clock period multiplied by 9 in nanoseconds".

Best Regards,
Rohan