[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <PH7PR11MB5885163CE356FF37F047D1E18E272@PH7PR11MB5885.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:36:41 +0000
From: "Olech, Milena" <milena.olech@...el.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Nguyen, Anthony L"
<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "Kitszel, Przemyslaw"
<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, "Lobakin, Aleksander"
<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 04/10] idpf: negotiate PTP
capabilies and get PTP clock
On 11/14/2024 9:20 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Milena Olech wrote:
> > PTP capabilities are negotiated using virtchnl command. Add get
> > capabilities function, direct access to read the PTP clock time and
> > direct access to read the cross timestamp - system time and PTP clock
> > time. Set initial PTP capabilities exposed to the stack.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Milena Olech <milena.olech@...el.com>
>
> Tested-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
>
> > /**
> > * struct idpf_ptp - PTP parameters
> > * @info: structure defining PTP hardware capabilities
> > * @clock: pointer to registered PTP clock device
> > * @adapter: back pointer to the adapter
> > + * @cmd: HW specific command masks
> > + * @dev_clk_regs: the set of registers to access the device clock
> > + * @caps: PTP capabilities negotiated with the Control Plane
> > + * @get_dev_clk_time_access: access type for getting the device clock time
> > + * @get_cross_tstamp_access: access type for the cross timestamping
> > */
> > struct idpf_ptp {
> > struct ptp_clock_info info;
> > struct ptp_clock *clock;
> > struct idpf_adapter *adapter;
> > + struct idpf_ptp_cmd cmd;
> > + struct idpf_ptp_dev_clk_regs dev_clk_regs;
> > + u32 caps;
> > + enum idpf_ptp_access get_dev_clk_time_access:16;
> > + enum idpf_ptp_access get_cross_tstamp_access:16;
>
> why are these 16 bit fields, when they are only ternary options?
Willem, I was trying to avoid holes in the struct and this is the best
shape I was able to obtain. I'll try to reorder it in v2 and limit the
16 bit.
Thanks,
Milena
Powered by blists - more mailing lists