linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/3] ptp: Provide support for auxiliary clocks for PTP_SYS_OFFSET

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: <20250701165610.6e2b9af2@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 16:56:10 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
 Christopher Hall <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>, John Stultz
 <jstultz@...gle.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Anna-Maria
 Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>,
 Werner Abt <werner.abt@...nberg-usa.com>, David Woodhouse
 <dwmw2@...radead.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Thomas
 Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>, Kurt
 Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>, Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>, Antoine
 Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] ptp: Provide support for auxiliary clocks for
 PTP_SYS_OFFSET_EXTENDED

On Tue, 01 Jul 2025 14:23:39 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01 2025 at 12:16, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > On 6/26/25 3:27 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:  
> >> It is also available via git with all prerequisite patches:
> >> 
> >>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/devel.git timers/ptp/driver-auxclock
> >> 
> >> Miroslav: This branch should enable you to test the actual steering via a
> >> 	  PTP device which has PTP_SYS_OFFSET_EXTENDED support in the driver.  
> >
> > I have some dumb issues merging this on net-next.
> >
> > It looks like we should pull from the above URL, but it looks like the
> > prereq series there has different hashes WRT the tip tree. Pulling from
> > there will cause good bunch of duplicate commits - the pre-req series vs
> > the tip tree and the ptp cleanup series vs already merge commits on
> > net-next.
> >
> > I guess we want to avoid such duplicates, but I don't see how to avoid
> > all of them. A stable branch on top of current net-next will avoid the
> > ptp cleanup series duplicates, but will not avoid duplicates for
> > prereqs. Am I missing something obvious?  
> 
> No. I messed that up by not telling that the PTP series should be
> applied as a seperate branch, which is merged into net-next. That way I
> could have merged that branch back into tip and apply this pile on top.
> 
> Let me think about an elegant way to make this work without creating an
> utter mess in either of the trees (or both).

Sorry about that, I read the previous cover letter as the branch being
provided for convenience, not that I _should_ pull from it. I should
have asked..