netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 4/4] ptp_ocp: implement DPLL ops

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 6 Dec 2022 18:33:13 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Vadim Fedorenko <vfedorenko@...ek.ru>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 4/4] ptp_ocp: implement DPLL ops

On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 14:39:17 +0000 Kubalewski, Arkadiusz wrote:
> >>>Btw, did you consider having dpll instance here as and auxdev? It
> >>>would be suitable I believe. It is quite simple to do it. See
> >>>following patch as an example:  
> >>
> >>I haven't think about it, definetly gonna take a look to see if there
> >>any benefits in ice.  
> >
> >Please do. The proper separation and bus/device modelling is at least one
> >of the benefits. The other one is that all dpll drivers would happily live
> >in drivers/dpll/ side by side.
> 
> Well, makes sense, but still need to take a closer look on that.
> I could do that on ice-driver part, don't feel strong enough yet to introduce
> Changes here in ptp_ocp.

FWIW auxdev makes absolutely no sense to me for DPLL :/
So Jiri, please say why.