Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v5 net-next 0/8] dpll/ice: Add TXC DPLL type and full TX reference clock control for E825

[Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 11:21:35 +0000 Nitka, Grzegorz wrote:
> > On Fri,  3 Apr 2026 01:06:18 +0200 Grzegorz Nitka wrote:  
> > > This series adds TX reference clock support for E825 devices and exposes
> > > TX clock selection and synchronization status via the Linux DPLL
> > > subsystem.
> > > E825 hardware contains a dedicated Tx clock (TXC) domain that is
> > > distinct
> > > from PPS and EEC. TX reference clock selection is device‑wide, shared
> > > across ports, and mediated by firmware as part of the link bring‑up
> > > process. As a result, TX clock selection intent may differ from the
> > > effective hardware configuration, and software must verify the outcome
> > > after link‑up.
> > > To support this, the series introduces TXC support incrementally across
> > > the DPLL core and the ice driver:
> > >
> > > - add a new DPLL type (TXC) to represent transmit clock generators;  
> > 
> > I'm not grasping why this is needed, isn't it part of any EEC system
> > that the DPLL can drive the TXC? Is your system going to expose multiple
> > DPLLs now for one NIC?
> 
> Hello Jakub,
> For E825 device, the short answer is yes. We have platform EEC now and
> we want to add:
> - TXC DPLLs per port, and
> - PPS DPLL for TSPLL config purposes (in the near future)
> 
> EEC (Ethernet Equipment Clock) type DPLL is designed to control multiple
> source signals (internal-NIC or external), where one drives the dpll device,
> where multiple outputs are possible, each could drive various components
> as well as propagate signal to external devices.
> TXC is specific dpll device that associated with single ETH port to control it's source,
> there is no need to declare any outputs as the single output is already determined.
> Basically, having TXC DPLL indicates per port control over SyncE (or some external)
> clock source. 

Could you share a diagram of how things are wired up?
DPLL can have multiple outputs and multiple inputs. I'm not getting why
a single device would have to have multiple actual DPLLs (which makes
me worried this is just some "convenient use of the uAPI")