On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 05:09:26PM +0200, Karol Kolacinski wrote:
> Add support of PTP SDPs (Software Definable Pins) for E825C products.
>
> Reviewed-by: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalew...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacin...@intel.com>
...
> @@ -2623,9 +2633,13 @@ static void ice_ptp_set_funcs_e82x(struct ice_pf *pf)
> pf->ptp.info.getcrosststamp = ice_ptp_getcrosststamp_e82x;
>
> #endif /* CONFIG_ICE_HWTS */
> - pf->ptp.info.enable = ice_ptp_gpio_enable;
> - pf->ptp.info.verify = ice_verify_pin;
> - pf->ptp.ice_pin_desc = ice_pin_desc_e82x;
> + if (ice_is_e825c(&pf->hw)) {
> + pf->ptp.ice_pin_desc = ice_pin_desc_e825c;
> + pf->ptp.info.n_pins = ICE_PIN_DESC_ARR_LEN(ice_pin_desc_e825c);
> + } else {
> + pf->ptp.ice_pin_desc = ice_pin_desc_e82x;
> + pf->ptp.info.n_pins = ICE_PIN_DESC_ARR_LEN(ice_pin_desc_e82x);
> + }
> pf->ptp.info.n_pins = ICE_PIN_DESC_ARR_LEN(ice_pin_desc_e82x);
Hi Karol,
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but should the line immediately
above be remove to avoid overwriting the value for pf->ptp.info.n_pins
set in the new if/else condition above?
> ice_ptp_setup_pin_cfg(pf);
> }
> @@ -2673,6 +2687,8 @@ static void ice_ptp_set_caps(struct ice_pf *pf)
> info->settime64 = ice_ptp_settime64;
> info->n_per_out = GLTSYN_TGT_H_IDX_MAX;
> info->n_ext_ts = GLTSYN_EVNT_H_IDX_MAX;
> + info->enable = ice_ptp_gpio_enable;
> + info->verify = ice_verify_pin;
>
> if (ice_is_e810(&pf->hw))
> ice_ptp_set_funcs_e810(pf, info);
Moving these assignments seems unnecessary, but ok.
