> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] macb: Common code to enable ptp support > for SAMA5Dx platforms. > > Le 18/01/2017 à 09:57, Andrei Pistirica a écrit : > > This patch does the following: > > - add GEM-PTP interface > > - registers and bitfields for TSU are named according to SAMA5Dx data > > sheet > > - PTP support based on platform capability > > The $subject will certainly never match reality, sadly "enable ptp support > for SAMA5Dx platforms". So, you'd better change it. > (no "." at the end BTW).
I will change it to: " Common code to enable ptp support for MACB/GEM" > > +2518,7 @@ static void macb_configure_caps(struct macb *bp, > > dcfg = gem_readl(bp, DCFG2); > > if ((dcfg & (GEM_BIT(RX_PKT_BUFF) | > GEM_BIT(TX_PKT_BUFF))) == 0) > > bp->caps |= MACB_CAPS_FIFO_MODE; > > + > > Nitpicking, just because other issue exists: this white line doesn't belong to > the patch. Ok I'll remove it. I missed it because checkpatch didn't report any warning. [...] > > #define MACB_CAPS_GIGABIT_MODE_AVAILABLE 0x20000000 > > #define MACB_CAPS_SG_DISABLED 0x40000000 > > #define MACB_CAPS_MACB_IS_GEM 0x80000000 > > +#define MACB_CAPS_GEM_HAS_PTP 0x00000020 > > No, this mask already exists a couple of lines above: > #define MACB_CAPS_JUMBO 0x00000020 > > That leads to a NACK, sorry (I didn't spotted earlier, BTW). Yes... you are right... sorry. [...] > Otherwise, I'm okay with the rest. > > I suggest to people that will keep the ball rolling on this topic to take > advantage of the chunks of code that Andrei developed with the help of > Richard and the best practices discussed. I think particularly, if it makes > sense with HW, about: > - gem_ptp_do_[rt]xstamp(bp, skb) dereference scheme > - gem_ptp_adjfine() rationale > - gem_get_ptp_peer() if needed Just mind that in case of an implementation with buffer rings and irqs a different mechanism have to be used. Regards, Andrei > > Regards, > -- > Nicolas Ferre