[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <02874ECE860811409154E81DA85FBB5884D0FDD0@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:55:20 +0000
From: "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 4/4] ixgbe: add support for extended PHC gettime
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcochran@...il.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 7:40 AM
> To: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>
> Cc: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>; netdev@...r.kernel.org; intel-wired-
> lan@...ts.osuosl.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] ixgbe: add support for extended PHC gettime
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 02:31:09PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > I think there could be a flag in ptp_system_timestamp, or a parameter
> > of gettimex64(), which would enable/disable reading of the system
> > clock.
>
> I'm not a fan of functions that change their behavior based on flags
> in their input parameters.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
Neither am I. I do however want to find a solution that avoids having drivers needlessly duplicate almost the same functionality.
Thanks,
Jake
Powered by blists - more mailing lists