[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180403035527.lgcm6gql3qx4rpuv@localhost>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 20:55:27 -0700
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC V1 5/5] net: mdio: Add a driver for InES
time stamping IP core.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 04:01:49PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> The best that I can think about and it still is a hack in some way, is
> to you have your time stamping driver create a proxy mii_bus whose
> purpose is just to hook to mdio/phy_device events (such as link changes)
> in order to do what is necessary, or at least, this would indicate its
> transparent nature towards the MDIO/MDC lines...
That won't work at all, AFAICT. There is only one mii_bus per netdev,
that is one that is attached to the phydev.
> Tangential: the existing PHY time stamping logic should probably be
> generalized to a mdio_device (which the phy_device is a specialized
> superset of) instead of to the phy_device. This would still allow
> existing use cases but it would also allow us to support possible "pure
> MDIO" devices would that become some thing in the future.
So this is exactly what I did. The time stamping methods were pushed
down into the mdio_device. The active device (mdiots pointer) points
either to a non-PHY mdio_device or to the mdio_device embedded in the
phydev.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists