[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f91001c9-2b11-53ac-84a7-11e1e94c5dc9@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 22:18:18 +0200
From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
CC: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 03/11] net: ethernet: ti: cpts: move tc mult
update in cpts_fifo_read()
On 26/03/2020 16:20, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:42:36PM +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> Now CPTS driver .adjfreq() generates request to read CPTS current time
>> (CPTS_EV_PUSH) with intention to process all pending event using previous
>> frequency adjustment values before switching to the new ones. So
>> CPTS_EV_PUSH works as a marker to switch to the new frequency adjustment
>> values. Current code assumes that all job is done in .adjfreq(), but after
>> enabling IRQ this will not be true any more.
>>
>> Hence save new frequency adjustment values (mult) and perform actual freq
>> adjustment in cpts_fifo_read() immediately after CPTS_EV_PUSH is received.
>
> Now THIS comment is much better! The explanation here really should
> be in the previous patch, to help poor reviewers like me.
I've been thinking to squash them. What's your opinion.
Thank you.
--
Best regards,
grygorii
Powered by blists - more mailing lists