[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241021194638.585a9870@device-21.home>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 19:46:38 +0200
From: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
To: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
<edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
<pabeni@...hat.com>, <andrew@...n.ch>, Lars Povlsen
<lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>, Steen Hegelund
<Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>, <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
<jensemil.schulzostergaard@...rochip.com>,
<Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>, <Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com>,
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
<ast@...erby.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 10/15] net: lan969x: add PTP handler function
Hi Daniel,
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 15:58:47 +0200
Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com> wrote:
> Add PTP IRQ handler for lan969x. This is required, as the PTP registers
> are placed in two different targets on Sparx5 and lan969x. The
> implementation is otherwise the same as on Sparx5.
>
> Also, expose sparx5_get_hwtimestamp() for use by lan969x.
>
> Reviewed-by: Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_main.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_main.h
> index 15f5d38776c4..3f66045c57ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_main.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_main.h
> @@ -114,6 +114,8 @@ enum sparx5_vlan_port_type {
> #define SPX5_DSM_CAL_LEN 64
> #define SPX5_DSM_CAL_MAX_DEVS_PER_TAXI 13
>
> +#define SPARX5_MAX_PTP_ID 512
> +
Sorry if I somehow missed it, but if you define SPARX5_MAX_PTP_ID here,
you probably don't need it to be also defined in sparx5_ptp.c as well ?
Thanks,
Maxime
Powered by blists - more mailing lists