On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:26:29AM -0500, Alex Fontaine wrote: > The PTP subsystem only allows one pin to be mapped to one channel for > periodic outputs. Why does the ptp subsystem force only allowing one pin > index to one a periodic output channel?
Because this has been sufficient up until now. If you would like to extend the implementation, then please post your patches to lkml and netdev. > It seems like a common use case to > want to assign a single periodic output to multiple pins. I am not aware of any such use cases. What is the point of have the same signal on multiple outputs? Sounds like needless duplication to me. > The current implementation has an undesired side effect. The ptp subsystem > will disable the old pin if you assign a new pin to that periodic output. > That behavior seems undesirable if the user is not notified when the pin is > disabled or not prevented from reassignment. Sorry, I don't know what your are complaining about. The ptp subsystem never disables a pin by itself. Only the user can do that. Since the user is in control of the ioctl, no notification is needed. Thanks, Richard PS these questions are really about the kernel, and so the lkml and netdev mailing lists are the place to ask them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
