[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230504133140.06ab37d0@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 13:31:40 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...a.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Arkadiusz Kubalewski
<arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>, Jonathan Lemon
<jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Milena Olech
<milena.olech@...el.com>, Michal Michalik <michal.michalik@...el.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
<poros@...hat.com>, <mschmidt@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v7 7/8] netdev: expose DPLL pin handle for netdevice
On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 17:20:08 -0700 Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
> @@ -2411,6 +2412,10 @@ struct net_device {
> struct rtnl_hw_stats64 *offload_xstats_l3;
>
> struct devlink_port *devlink_port;
> +
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DPLL)
> + struct dpll_pin *dpll_pin;
> +#endif
kdoc is missing. I'm guessing that one pin covers all current user
cases but we should clearly document on what this pin is, so that when
we extend the code to support multiple pins (in/out, per lane, idk)
we know which one this was.. ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists