[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140813211941.GB4840@netboy>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:19:42 +0200
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Fugang Duan <b38611@...escale.com>
Cc: shawn.guo@...aro.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] net: fec: ptp: avoid register access when ipg
clock is disabled
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:55:05PM +0800, Fugang Duan wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c
> index 66fe1f6..8befa2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c
> @@ -2198,6 +2198,8 @@ fec_enet_open(struct net_device *ndev)
> napi_enable(&fep->napi);
> phy_start(fep->phy_dev);
> netif_start_queue(ndev);
> + if (fep->hwts_tx_en)
> + schedule_delayed_work(&fep->time_keep, HZ);
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -2206,6 +2208,9 @@ fec_enet_close(struct net_device *ndev)
> {
> struct fec_enet_private *fep = netdev_priv(ndev);
>
> + if (fep->hwts_tx_en)
> + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&fep->time_keep);
You make the clock logic depend on whether time stamping is enabled or
not. Why do you do that?
The clock should keep ticking, even if time stamping is disabled.
Thanks,
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists