[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230310160648.vwzbyood3rectlr7@skbuf>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:06:48 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>,
Jie Wang <wangjie125@...wei.com>,
Oleksij Rempel <linux@...pel-privat.de>,
Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
Marco Bonelli <marco@...eim.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] net: Let the active time stamping layer be
selectable.
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 02:34:07PM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
> Yeah, but my problem right now is, that if this discussion won't find
> any good solution, the lan8814 phy timestamping will find it's way
> into an official kernel and then it is really hard to undo things.
>
> So, I'd really prefer to *first* have a discussion how to proceed
> with the PHY timestamping and then add the lan8814 support, so
> existing boards don't show a regressions.
You don't mean LAN8814 but LAN8841, no?
For the former, PTP support was added in commit ece19502834d ("net: phy:
micrel: 1588 support for LAN8814 phy") - first present in v5.18.
For the latter, it was commit cafc3662ee3f ("net: micrel: Add PHC
support for lan8841"), and this one indeed is in the v6.3 release
candidates.
Assuming you can prove a regression, how about adding the PHY driver
whitelist *without* the lan8841 as a patch to net.git? (blaming commit
cafc3662ee3f ("net: micrel: Add PHC support for lan8841")).
Doing this will effectively deactivate lan8841 PHY timestamping without
reverting the code. Then, this PHY timestamping support could be
activated back in net-next, based on some sort of explicit UAPI call.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists