[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180403131319.GD31740@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:13:19 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, 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 Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 08:55:27PM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote:
> 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.
Hi Richard
Have you tried implementing it using a phandle in the phy node,
pointing to the time stamping device?
I think it makes a much better architecture.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists