linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] net: phy: Kconfig: Add ptp library support and 1588 optional flag in Microchip phys

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: <ee883c7a-f8af-4de6-b7d3-90e883af7dec@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 17:02:46 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com
Cc: Arun.Ramadoss@...rochip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
	hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
	edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	richardcochran@...il.com, vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] net: phy: Kconfig: Add ptp library
 support and 1588 optional flag in Microchip phys

> > How many different PTP implementations does Microchip have?
> > 
> > I see mscc_ptp.c, lan743x_ptp.c, lan966x_ptp.c and sparx5_ptp.c. Plus this
> > one.
> > 
> 
> These are MAC specific PTP. The library that we implemented is for PHYs.

And the difference is? Marvell has one PTP implementation they use in
the PHYs and MACs in Ethernet switches. The basic core is the same,
with different wrappers around it.

> > Does Microchip keep reinventing the wheel? Or can this library be used in
> > place of any of these? 
> 

> As there are no register similarities between these implementations,
> we cannot use this library for the above mentioned MAC PTPs.

> 
> >And how many more ptp implementations will
> > microchip have in the future? Maybe MICROCHIP_PHYPTP is too generic,
> > maybe you should leave space for the next PTP implementation?

> Microchip plan is to use this PTP IP in future PHYs. Hence this phy
> library will be reused in future PHYs.

And future MACs? 

And has Microchip finial decided not to keep reinventing the wheel,
and there will never be a new PHY implementation? I ask, because what
would its KCONFIG symbol be?

	Andrew