[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251021165230.1a702ffd@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 16:52:30 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: andrew@...n.ch, Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, richardcochran@...il.com, vladimir.oltean@....com,
vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev, rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk,
christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr, rosenp@...il.com,
steen.hegelund@...rochip.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4 2/2] phy: mscc: Fix PTP for VSC8574 and VSC8572
On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 11:07:20 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On 10/21/25 1:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 08:48:19 +0200 Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> >> For VSC8574 and VSC8572, the PTP initialization is incomplete. It is
> >> missing the first part but it makes the second part. Meaning that the
> >> ptp_clock_register() is never called.
> >>
> >> There is no crash without the first part when enabling PTP but this is
> >> unexpected because some PHys have PTP functionality exposed by the
> >> driver and some don't even though they share the same PTP clock PTP.
> >
> > I'm tempted to queue this to net-next, sounds like a "never worked
> > in an obvious way" case. I'd appreciate a second opinion.. Andrew?
>
> FTR, I agree with the above, as (out of sheer ignorance) I think/fear
> the first patch can potentially cause regressions.
Thanks, let's rephrase the commits message on patch 1 (per Russell's
comments) and get this reposted for net-next (without the Fixes tag).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists