netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/5] dpll: spec: add support for pin-dpll signal phase offset/adjust

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]

Message-ID: <ZR/9yCVakCrDbBww@nanopsycho>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 14:30:00 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev, corbet@....net,
	davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
	jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/5] dpll: spec: add support for pin-dpll
 signal phase offset/adjust

Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 01:40:58PM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com wrote:
>Add attributes for providing the user with:
>- measurement of signals phase offset between pin and dpll
>- ability to adjust the phase of pin signal
>
>Signed-off-by: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
>---
> Documentation/netlink/specs/dpll.yaml | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/dpll/dpll_nl.c                |  8 ++++---
> drivers/dpll/dpll_nl.h                |  2 +-
> include/uapi/linux/dpll.h             |  8 ++++++-
> 4 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/Documentation/netlink/specs/dpll.yaml b/Documentation/netlink/specs/dpll.yaml
>index 8b86b28b47a6..dc057494101f 100644
>--- a/Documentation/netlink/specs/dpll.yaml
>+++ b/Documentation/netlink/specs/dpll.yaml
>@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: ((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-3-Clause)
> 
> name: dpll
>-
>+version: 2

I'm confused. Didn't you say you'll remove this? If not, my question
from v1 still stands.