Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 4 Apr 2022 22:59:54 -0700
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To:     Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, davem@davemloft.net,
        grygorii.strashko@ti.com, kuba@kernel.org, kurt@linutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
        mlichvar@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com, vladimir.oltean@nxp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 3/4] net: Let the active time stamping
 layer be selectable.
Message-ID: <20220405055954.GB91955@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
References: <20220104014215.GA20062@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
 <20220404150508.3945833-1-michael@walle.cc>
 <YksMvHgXZxA+YZci@lunn.ch>
 <e5a6f6193b86388ed7a081939b8745be@walle.cc>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e5a6f6193b86388ed7a081939b8745be@walle.cc>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 07:12:11PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote:

> That would make sense. I guess what bothers me with the current
> mechanism is that a feature addition to the PHY in the *future* (the
> timestamping support) might break a board - or at least changes the
> behavior by suddenly using PHY timestamping.

That is a good point, but then something will break in any case.

Thanks,
Richard