Hi Rodolfo Giometti,
This is regarding Intel Timed I/O device as PPS.
Intel Timed I/O is a precise device (10s of nanoseconds), that can send out pulses.
This is needed in IoT and server applications to measure offset between system clocks on multiple devices
We are planning to implement a driver, for PPS output functionality using Timed I/O device.
1. Is there any support from PPS framework to start/stop pulse generation.
If yes, can we get the Pin number, offset(start time) from user space ?
2. Further, this device has the capability to capture the input events (pulses, nanosecond precision).
The same PIN can work in either input or output mode.
Can there be an PPS client driver supporting both modes ?
Regards,
Pandith
On 30/01/23 13:55, N, Pandith wrote:
> Hi Rodolfo Giometti,
Hello.
> This is regarding Intel Timed I/O device as PPS.
>
> Intel Timed I/O is a precise device (10s of nanoseconds), that can send out pulses.
> This is needed in IoT and server applications to measure offset between system clocks on multiple devices
Can you please provide some URLs where to get further info from about this
device? I'd like to know how this device works and its interfaces towards the CPU.
> We are planning to implement a driver, for PPS output functionality using Timed I/O device.
Great! :)
> 1. Is there any support from PPS framework to start/stop pulse generation.
> If yes, can we get the Pin number, offset(start time) from user space ?
Nope, PPS signals are supposed to be always on. However you can start/stop
pulses generation within the main driver of your device.
> 2. Further, this device has the capability to capture the input events (pulses, nanosecond precision).
> The same PIN can work in either input or output mode.
> Can there be an PPS client driver supporting both modes ?
I'm not sure to well understand what you mean, however a PPS client is a piece
of code that captures PPS pulses and add a timestamp to them, while a PPS
generator is a piece of code that (precisely) generates a PPS source according
to the system's main clock (and not according to a peripheral's clock). Hope
I've answered to your questions, if not feel free to ask more.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2023 7:15 PM
> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>
> On 30/01/23 13:55, N, Pandith wrote:
> > Hi Rodolfo Giometti,
>
> Hello.
>
> > This is regarding Intel Timed I/O device as PPS.
> >
> > Intel Timed I/O is a precise device (10s of nanoseconds), that can send out
> pulses.
> > This is needed in IoT and server applications to measure offset
> > between system clocks on multiple devices
>
> Can you please provide some URLs where to get further info from about this
> device? I'd like to know how this device works and its interfaces towards the
> CPU.
>
Here is a presentation link for Timed I/O device
https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1387/attachments/1051/2010/Timed_IO_LPC.pdf
> > We are planning to implement a driver, for PPS output functionality using
> Timed I/O device.
>
> Great! :)
>
> > 1. Is there any support from PPS framework to start/stop pulse
> generation.
> > If yes, can we get the Pin number, offset(start time) from user space
> ?
>
> Nope, PPS signals are supposed to be always on. However you can start/stop
> pulses generation within the main driver of your device.
>
OK. Wanted to check from PPS framework if can provide any user control for start/stop.
> > 2. Further, this device has the capability to capture the input events
> (pulses, nanosecond precision).
> > The same PIN can work in either input or output mode.
> > Can there be an PPS client driver supporting both modes ?
>
> I'm not sure to well understand what you mean, however a PPS client is a
> piece of code that captures PPS pulses and add a timestamp to them, while a
> PPS generator is a piece of code that (precisely) generates a PPS source
> according to the system's main clock (and not according to a peripheral's
> clock). Hope I've answered to your questions, if not feel free to ask more.
>
Intel Timed I/O PIN has both generator functionality and input capability.
Wanted to ask if it’s better to have two separate drivers, one under client
for input and other as generator driver for PPS output.
OR
Have a single client driver and user can choose the functionality (either
PPS output or as PPS source to capture pulses with timestamps).
> Ciao,
>
> Rodolfo
>
> --
> GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
> Linux Device Driver [email protected]
> Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
> UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
On 30/01/23 15:11, N, Pandith wrote:
> Here is a presentation link for Timed I/O device
> https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1387/attachments/1051/2010/Timed_IO_LPC.pdf
Thanks. I'll take a look at it.
> Intel Timed I/O PIN has both generator functionality and input capability.
> Wanted to ask if it’s better to have two separate drivers, one under client
> for input and other as generator driver for PPS output.
> OR
> Have a single client driver and user can choose the functionality (either
> PPS output or as PPS source to capture pulses with timestamps).
Within kernel sources PPS clients and PPS generators are placed into different
directories, so I suppose is better to deploy two different pieces of code.
However pay attention to the fact that a PPS generator should be referred to
system's main clock and not to peripherals' clock.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Hi Rodolfo,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2023 7:57 PM
> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>
> On 30/01/23 15:11, N, Pandith wrote:
> > Here is a presentation link for Timed I/O device
> > https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1387/attachments/1051/2010/T
> > imed_IO_LPC.pdf
>
> Thanks. I'll take a look at it.
>
> > Intel Timed I/O PIN has both generator functionality and input capability.
> > Wanted to ask if it’s better to have two separate drivers, one under
> > client for input and other as generator driver for PPS output.
> > OR
> > Have a single client driver and user can choose the functionality
> > (either PPS output or as PPS source to capture pulses with timestamps).
> Within kernel sources PPS clients and PPS generators are placed into different
> directories, so I suppose is better to deploy two different pieces of code.
>
We are planning to add a new PPS generator driver in drivers/pps/generators
i) Can this driver use pps_register_source to register Intel Timed I/O device for pulse generation ?
ii) To start/stop pulse, we are planning to add additional sysfs attribute from our main driver.
Something like : /sys/class/ppsX/enable_pin
This is needed for users to start/stop pulse generation.
> However pay attention to the fact that a PPS generator should be referred to
> system's main clock and not to peripherals' clock.
>
We can sync with the system time for pulse generation.
> Ciao,
>
> Rodolfo
>
> --
> GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
> Linux Device Driver [email protected]
> Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
> UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Regards,
Pandith
On 06/02/23 11:16, N, Pandith wrote:
> Hi Rodolfo,
Hi
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2023 7:57 PM
>> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
>> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
>> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
>> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
>> <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>> Within kernel sources PPS clients and PPS generators are placed into different
>> directories, so I suppose is better to deploy two different pieces of code.
>>
> We are planning to add a new PPS generator driver in drivers/pps/generators
> i) Can this driver use pps_register_source to register Intel Timed I/O device for pulse generation ?
Nope. This function is for pps clients only. PPS generators should generate
their pulses according to system clock so they don't needed any registrations at
all under PPS layer.
> ii) To start/stop pulse, we are planning to add additional sysfs attribute from our main driver.
> Something like : /sys/class/ppsX/enable_pin
> This is needed for users to start/stop pulse generation.
If you are still talking about PPS generators they have no entries under
/sys/class/ppsX/ (just clients have). So you can add an entry under your driver
to do so.
>> However pay attention to the fact that a PPS generator should be referred to
>> system's main clock and not to peripherals' clock.
>>
> We can sync with the system time for pulse generation.
Mmm... I'm not sure this is correct since PPS generators should generate their
pulses according to system clock and not according to their internal clocks even
if they are synced with the system clock.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Hi Rodolfo,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 4:17 PM
> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>
> On 06/02/23 11:16, N, Pandith wrote:
> > Hi Rodolfo,
>
> Hi
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2023 7:57 PM
> >> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
> >> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
> >> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
> >> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>
> >> Within kernel sources PPS clients and PPS generators are placed into
> >> different directories, so I suppose is better to deploy two different pieces
> of code.
> >>
> > We are planning to add a new PPS generator driver in
> > drivers/pps/generators
> > i) Can this driver use pps_register_source to register Intel Timed I/O device
> for pulse generation ?
>
> Nope. This function is for pps clients only. PPS generators should generate
> their pulses according to system clock so they don't needed any registrations
> at all under PPS layer.
>
> > ii) To start/stop pulse, we are planning to add additional sysfs attribute
> from our main driver.
> > Something like : /sys/class/ppsX/enable_pin This is needed for users
> > to start/stop pulse generation.
>
> If you are still talking about PPS generators they have no entries under
> /sys/class/ppsX/ (just clients have). So you can add an entry under your
> driver to do so.
>
Thanks, we will add entry in our driver :)
> >> However pay attention to the fact that a PPS generator should be
> >> referred to system's main clock and not to peripherals' clock.
> >>
> > We can sync with the system time for pulse generation.
>
> Mmm... I'm not sure this is correct since PPS generators should generate
> their pulses according to system clock and not according to their internal
> clocks even if they are synced with the system clock.
>
Timed I/O and system time are both driven by the *same* hardware clock.
Timed I/O is a high precision device (nanoseconds), able to output pulses.
The driver gets the system time and schedules output
at target_time in the future.
struct timespec64 current_time;
current_time = ktime_get_real_ts64(¤t_time);
target_time = current_time + offset_time;
cycles = translate_system_time_to_clock_cycles(target_time);
/* Translate function is developed as part of this driver development */
/* Schedule pulse at target_time */
write_timedio_reg(TIMEDIO_TRIGGER, cycles);
The output always triggers with ~20 ns precision.
It's not affected by system load or no need for drivers to disable interrupts for longer durations.
With this driver proposal, Intel Timed I/O as PPS generator will be useful in IoT and server applications.
> Ciao,
>
> Rodolfo
>
> --
> GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
> Linux Device Driver [email protected]
> Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
> UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Regards,
Pandith
On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
> Hi Rodolfo,
Hello.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 4:17 PM
>> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
>> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
>> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
>> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
>> <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
[snip]
>> Mmm... I'm not sure this is correct since PPS generators should generate
>> their pulses according to system clock and not according to their internal
>> clocks even if they are synced with the system clock.
>>
> Timed I/O and system time are both driven by the *same* hardware clock.
> Timed I/O is a high precision device (nanoseconds), able to output pulses.
> The driver gets the system time and schedules output
> at target_time in the future.
OK, in this case it would be OK. Please put an appropriate note within the
generator's code and a detailed one within Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst.
Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can
add your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to
rewrite it according to your needs.
> struct timespec64 current_time;
> current_time = ktime_get_real_ts64(¤t_time);
>
> target_time = current_time + offset_time;
> cycles = translate_system_time_to_clock_cycles(target_time);
> /* Translate function is developed as part of this driver development */
>
> /* Schedule pulse at target_time */
> write_timedio_reg(TIMEDIO_TRIGGER, cycles);
>
> The output always triggers with ~20 ns precision.
> It's not affected by system load or no need for drivers to disable interrupts for longer durations.
> With this driver proposal, Intel Timed I/O as PPS generator will be useful in IoT and server applications.
Great! Please also add these notes to the final Documentation.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 1:16 PM
> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
> <[email protected]>; Gross, Mark <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>
> On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
> > Hi Rodolfo,
>
> Hello.
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 4:17 PM
> >> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
> >> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
> >> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
> >> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>
> [snip]
>
> >> Mmm... I'm not sure this is correct since PPS generators should
> >> generate their pulses according to system clock and not according to
> >> their internal clocks even if they are synced with the system clock.
> >>
> > Timed I/O and system time are both driven by the *same* hardware clock.
> > Timed I/O is a high precision device (nanoseconds), able to output pulses.
> > The driver gets the system time and schedules output at target_time in
> > the future.
>
> OK, in this case it would be OK. Please put an appropriate note within the
> generator's code and a detailed one within Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst.
>
> Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
> separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can add
> your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to rewrite it
> according to your needs.
>
Ok, we are updating documentation as you have suggested as a separate patch.
Can we use your "Signed-off-by" tag for attached patch.
We are adding Intel timed I/O documentation as a separate patch.
> > struct timespec64 current_time;
> > current_time = ktime_get_real_ts64(¤t_time);
> >
> > target_time = current_time + offset_time; cycles =
> > translate_system_time_to_clock_cycles(target_time);
> > /* Translate function is developed as part of this driver development
> > */
> >
> > /* Schedule pulse at target_time */
> > write_timedio_reg(TIMEDIO_TRIGGER, cycles);
> >
> > The output always triggers with ~20 ns precision.
> > It's not affected by system load or no need for drivers to disable interrupts for
> longer durations.
> > With this driver proposal, Intel Timed I/O as PPS generator will be useful in IoT
> and server applications.
>
> Great! Please also add these notes to the final Documentation.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Rodolfo
>
> --
> GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
> Linux Device Driver [email protected]
> Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
> UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Regards,
Pandith
On 06/10/23 07:31, N, Pandith wrote:
> Hi,
Hello.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 1:16 PM
>> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
>> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
>> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
>> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
>> <[email protected]>; Gross, Mark <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>>
>> On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
>>> Hi Rodolfo,
>>
>> Hello.
>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 4:17 PM
>>>> To: N, Pandith <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
>>>> <[email protected]>; D, Lakshmi Sowjanya
>>>> <[email protected]>; T R, Thejesh Reddy
>>>> <[email protected]>; Hall, Christopher S
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> Mmm... I'm not sure this is correct since PPS generators should
>>>> generate their pulses according to system clock and not according to
>>>> their internal clocks even if they are synced with the system clock.
>>>>
>>> Timed I/O and system time are both driven by the *same* hardware clock.
>>> Timed I/O is a high precision device (nanoseconds), able to output pulses.
>>> The driver gets the system time and schedules output at target_time in
>>> the future.
>>
>> OK, in this case it would be OK. Please put an appropriate note within the
>> generator's code and a detailed one within Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst.
>>
>> Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
>> separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can add
>> your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to rewrite it
>> according to your needs.
>>
> Ok, we are updating documentation as you have suggested as a separate patch.
> Can we use your "Signed-off-by" tag for attached patch.
If you just followed my suggestion then it's OK for me.
> We are adding Intel timed I/O documentation as a separate patch.
OK.
Ciao,
Rodolfo Giometti
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 08:23:09AM +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> On 06/10/23 07:31, N, Pandith wrote:
> > > From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 1:16 PM
> > > On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
> > > > > From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 4:17 PM
[snip]
> > > Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
> > > separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can add
> > > your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to rewrite it
> > > according to your needs.
> > >
> > Ok, we are updating documentation as you have suggested as a separate patch.
> > Can we use your "Signed-off-by" tag for attached patch.
>
> If you just followed my suggestion then it's OK for me.
But can we have your SoB or not? If so, please provide it explicitly as
the (Linux kernel) process requires.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:34:10AM +0300, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 08:23:09AM +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> > On 06/10/23 07:31, N, Pandith wrote:
> > > > From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 1:16 PM
> > > > On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
[snip]
> > > > Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
> > > > separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can add
> > > > your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to rewrite it
> > > > according to your needs.
> > > >
> > > Ok, we are updating documentation as you have suggested as a separate patch.
> > > Can we use your "Signed-off-by" tag for attached patch.
> >
> > If you just followed my suggestion then it's OK for me.
>
> But can we have your SoB or not? If so, please provide it explicitly as
> the (Linux kernel) process requires.
Or even better if you provide the patch itself or apply directly to your tree
that we can rebase the our stuff on.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On 06/10/23 10:34, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:34:10AM +0300, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 08:23:09AM +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
>>> On 06/10/23 07:31, N, Pandith wrote:
>>>>> From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 1:16 PM
>>>>> On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>>>> Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
>>>>> separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can add
>>>>> your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to rewrite it
>>>>> according to your needs.
>>>>>
>>>> Ok, we are updating documentation as you have suggested as a separate patch.
>>>> Can we use your "Signed-off-by" tag for attached patch.
>>>
>>> If you just followed my suggestion then it's OK for me.
>>
>> But can we have your SoB or not? If so, please provide it explicitly as
>> the (Linux kernel) process requires.
>
> Or even better if you provide the patch itself or apply directly to your tree
> that we can rebase the our stuff on.
Just send the patch to the kernel mail list and, if OK, I'm going to sign it and
forwarding to Greg Kroah-Hartman.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 10:57:37AM +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> On 06/10/23 10:34, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:34:10AM +0300, [email protected] wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 08:23:09AM +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> > > > On 06/10/23 07:31, N, Pandith wrote:
> > > > > > From: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 1:16 PM
> > > > > > On 15/02/23 08:09, N, Pandith wrote:
[snip]
> > > > > > Regarding Documentation/driver-api/pps.rst let me suggest you to prose a
> > > > > > separate patch to rewrite the Generators section in such a way you easily can add
> > > > > > your solution at the end. A possible example is attached but feel free to rewrite it
> > > > > > according to your needs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Ok, we are updating documentation as you have suggested as a separate patch.
> > > > > Can we use your "Signed-off-by" tag for attached patch.
> > > >
> > > > If you just followed my suggestion then it's OK for me.
> > >
> > > But can we have your SoB or not? If so, please provide it explicitly as
> > > the (Linux kernel) process requires.
> >
> > Or even better if you provide the patch itself or apply directly to your tree
> > that we can rebase the our stuff on.
>
> Just send the patch to the kernel mail list and, if OK, I'm going to sign it
> and forwarding to Greg Kroah-Hartman.
Okay, now it's clear, thank you!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko