Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Y.b. Lu" <yangbo.lu@nxp.com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins
Thread-Topic: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins
Thread-Index: AQHV/qQWBIiKj5A/T0WD8BjMeGVxRqhZUaeAgAFP25A=
Date:   Thu, 26 Mar 2020 09:25:11 +0000
Message-ID: <AM7PR04MB6885D1A865AD7E539DAA16F6F8CF0@AM7PR04MB6885.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20200320103726.32559-1-yangbo.lu@nxp.com>
 <20200320103726.32559-7-yangbo.lu@nxp.com> <20200325131534.GA32284@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <20200325131534.GA32284@localhost>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nxp.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f0971688-e420-4646-1909-08d7d1679543
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Mar 2020 09:25:11.0820
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 686ea1d3-bc2b-4c6f-a92c-d99c5c301635
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: WZVt6k80X+806uqARoBkOAJqXsGz8G430ZjynMong/iXrTZOTV/0F9YeKDyCDUfkkH6OcUjdDIugc+4WI/tp+Q==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM7PR04MB7192
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Richard,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 9:16 PM
> To: Y.b. Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; David S . Mille=
r
> <davem@davemloft.net>; Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>;
> Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>; Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>;
> Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>; Florian Fainelli
> <f.fainelli@gmail.com>; Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>=
;
> Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins
>=20
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 06:37:26PM +0800, Yangbo Lu wrote:
> > Support 4 programmable pins for only one function periodic
> > signal for now.
>=20
> For now?

Yes. The pin on Ocelot/Felix supports both PTP_PF_PEROUT and PTP_PF_EXTTS f=
unctions.
But the PTP_PF_EXTTS function should be implemented separately in Ocelot an=
d Felix since hardware interrupt implementation is different on them.
I am responsible for Felix. However I am facing some issue on PTP_PF_EXTTS =
function on hardware. It may take a long time to discuss internally.

Thanks.

>=20
> > +static int ocelot_ptp_verify(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp, unsigned int =
pin,
> > +			     enum ptp_pin_function func, unsigned int chan)
> > +{
> > +	switch (func) {
> > +	case PTP_PF_NONE:
> > +	case PTP_PF_PEROUT:
> > +		break;
>=20
> If the functions cannot be changed, then supporting the
> PTP_PIN_SETFUNC ioctl does not make sense!

Did you mean the dead lock issue? Or you thought the pin supported only PTP=
_PF_PEROUT function in hardware?

>=20
> > +	case PTP_PF_EXTTS:
> > +	case PTP_PF_PHYSYNC:
> > +		return -1;
> > +	}
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
>=20
> Thanks,
> Richard