Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] dpll: documentation on DPLL subsystem interface

From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: geert+renesas@glider.be, mst@redhat.com, razor@blackwall.org,
	phil@nwl.cc, javierm@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
	benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
	lucien.xin@gmail.com, leon@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com,
	vadfed@meta.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
	airlied@redhat.com, vadfed@fb.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
	ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com, arnd@arndb.de, idosch@nvidia.com,
	richardcochran@gmail.com, claudiajkang@gmail.com,
	kuniyu@amazon.com, jacek.lawrynowicz@linux.intel.com,
	liuhangbin@gmail.com, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
	sj@kernel.org, vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev, linux@zary.sk,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, ogabbay@kernel.org,
	nipun.gupta@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	andy.ren@getcruise.com, tzimmermann@suse.de,
	jonathan.lemon@gmail.com, saeedm@nvidia.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	milena.olech@intel.com, hkallweit1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] dpll: documentation on DPLL subsystem interface
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 11:27:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZImH/6GzGdydC3U3@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230613093801.735cd341@kernel.org>

Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 06:38:01PM CEST, kuba@kernel.org wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:55:11 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> +``'pin': [{
>> >> + {'clock-id': 282574471561216,
>> >> +  'module-name': 'ice',
>> >> +  'pin-dpll-caps': 4,
>> >> +  'pin-id': 13,
>> >> +  'pin-parent': [{'pin-id': 2, 'pin-state': 'connected'},
>> >> +                 {'pin-id': 3, 'pin-state': 'disconnected'},
>> >> +                 {'id': 0, 'pin-direction': 'input'},
>> >> +                 {'id': 1, 'pin-direction': 'input'}],
>> >> +  'pin-type': 'synce-eth-port'}
>> >> +}]``  
>> >
>> >It seems like pin-parent is overloaded, can we split it into two
>> >different nests?  
>> 
>> Yeah, we had it as two and converged to this one. The thing is, the rest
>> of the attrs are the same for both parent pin and parent device. I link
>> it this way a bit better. No strong feeling.
>
>Do you mean the same attribute enum / "space" / "set"?

Yeah, that is my understanding. Arkadiusz, could you please clarify?

>In the example above the attributes present don't seem to overlap.
>For user space its an extra if to sift thru the objects under
>pin-parent.
>
>> >Also sounds like setting pin attrs and pin-parent attrs should be
>> >different commands.  
>> 
>> Could be, but what't the benefit? Also, you are not configuring
>> pin-parent. You are configuring pin:pin-parent tuple. Basically the pin
>> configuration as a child. So this is mainly config of the pin itsest
>> Therefore does not really make sense to me to split to two comments.
>
>Clarity of the API. If muxing everything thru few calls was the goal
>we should also have very few members in struct dpll_pin_ops, and we
>don't.

How the the internal kernel api related to the uapi? I mean, it's quite
common to have 1:N relationsip between cmd and op. I have to be missing
your point. Could you be more specific please?

Current code presents PIN_SET command with accepts structured set of
attribute to be set. The core-driver api is pretty clear. Squashing to
a single op would be disaster. Having one command per attr looks like an
overkill without any real benefit. How exactly do you propose to change
this?
_______________________________________________
Intel-wired-lan mailing list
Intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan