[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y88MqqbnUE6JWP3k@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 14:39:38 -0800
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc: Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@...dia.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
Vincent Cheng <vincent.cheng.xh@...esas.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 03/15] net/mlx5: Add adjphase function to support
hardware-only offset control
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 11:13:35AM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote:
> > 1. Can the PHC servo change the frequency and not be expected to reset
> > it back to the frequency before the phase control word is issued? If
> > it's an expectation for the phase control word to reset the frequency
> > back, I think that needs to be updated in the comments as a
> > requirement.
>
>
> My understanding from what Richard said is that .adjphase basically
> offloads the entire servo and corrections to the hardware, and thus
> would become responsible for maintaining the phase correction long term,
> and callers would not use both .adjphase at the same time as .adjtime or
> .adjfine
Right.
> > 2. Is it expected that a PHC servo implementation has a fixed
> > configuration? In userspace servo implementations, configuration
> > parameters are supported. Would we need devlink parameters to support
> > configuring a PHC servo?
> >
>
> I would assume some sort of parameter configuration, either via devlink
> or something in the ptp_clock ecosystem if we get a device that has such
> configuration?
Yeah, but so far no one has asked for this.
Could also be debugfs if no commonality between hardware exists.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists