[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZZczNlXzM8lrZgH5@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 14:37:42 -0800
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
Don Hatchett <hatch@...gle.com>, Yuliang Li <yuliangli@...gle.com>,
Mahesh Bandewar <mahesh@...dewar.net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 2/3] ptp: add ioctl interface for
ptp_gettimex64any()
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 01:24:39PM -0800, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> @@ -226,6 +238,8 @@ struct ptp_pin_desc {
> _IOWR(PTP_CLK_MAGIC, 18, struct ptp_sys_offset_extended)
> #define PTP_MASK_CLEAR_ALL _IO(PTP_CLK_MAGIC, 19)
> #define PTP_MASK_EN_SINGLE _IOW(PTP_CLK_MAGIC, 20, unsigned int)
> +#define PTP_SYS_OFFSET_ANY \
> + _IOWR(PTP_CLK_MAGIC, 21, struct ptp_sys_offset_any)
As I said before, this functionality really ought to be a new system call.
Did you see these patch series posted on the list?
31.Dec'23 Sagi Maimon [PATCH v4] posix-timers: add multi_clock_gettime system call
31.Dec'23 Andy Lutomirski ├─>
01.Jan'24 Sagi Maimon │ └─>
01.Jan'24 kernel test rob ├─>
01.Jan'24 kernel test rob └─>
02.Jan'24 Sagi Maimon [PATCH v5] posix-timers: add multi_clock_gettime system call
02.Jan'24 Arnd Bergmann ├─>
03.Jan'24 Sagi Maimon │ └─>
04.Jan'24 kernel test rob └─>
I think this will be the way forward.
Please review the multi_clock_gettime series and help refine it.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists