[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7fa02bc1-64bd-483d-b3e9-f4ffe0bbb9fb@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 03:16:43 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@...dia.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1] ptp: Make max_phase_adjustment sysfs device
attribute invisible when not supported
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 04:21:39PM -0700, Rahul Rameshbabu wrote:
> The .adjphase operation is an operation that is implemented only by certain
> PHCs. The sysfs device attribute node for querying the maximum phase
> adjustment supported should not be exposed on devices that do not support
> .adjphase.
>
> Fixes: c3b60ab7a4df ("ptp: Add .getmaxphase callback to ptp_clock_info")
> Signed-off-by: Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@...dia.com>
> Reported-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
> Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230627162146.GA114473@dev-arch.thelio-3990X/
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYtKCZeAUTtwe69iK8Xcz1mOKQzwcy49wd+imZrfj6ifXA@mail.gmail.com/
I think Signed-off-by should be last.
> diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_sysfs.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_sysfs.c
> index 77219cdcd683..6e4d5456a885 100644
> --- a/drivers/ptp/ptp_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_sysfs.c
> @@ -358,6 +358,9 @@ static umode_t ptp_is_attribute_visible(struct kobject *kobj,
> attr == &dev_attr_max_vclocks.attr) {
> if (ptp->is_virtual_clock)
> mode = 0;
> + } else if (attr == &dev_attr_max_phase_adjustment.attr) {
> + if (!info->adjphase || !info->getmaxphase)
> + mode = 0;
Maybe it is time to turn this into a switch statement?
I also wounder if this really is something for net. How do you think
this patch matches against the stable rules?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists