Re: [RFC PATCH v9 00/10] Create common DPLL configuration API

Jiri Pirko
2023-06-28T13:10:01Z

Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 01:11:19PM CEST, vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev wrote:
>On 28/06/2023 10:27, Kubalewski, Arkadiusz wrote:
>> > From: Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
>> > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:15 AM
>> >
>> > > From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 12:18 PM
>> > >
>> > > Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 02:38:10PM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > v8 -> v9:
>> > >
>> > > Could you please address all the unresolved issues from v8 and send v10?
>> > > I'm not reviewing this one.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Sure, will do, but first missing to-do/discuss list:
>> > 1) remove mode_set as not used by any driver
>> > 2) remove "no-added-value" static functions descriptions in
>> > dpll_core/dpll_netlink
>> > 3) merge patches [ 03/10, 04/10, 05/10 ] into patches that are compiling
>> > after each patch apply
>> > 4) remove function return values descriptions/lists
>> > 5) Fix patch [05/10]:
>> > - status Supported
>> > - additional maintainers
>> > - remove callback:
>> > int (*source_pin_idx_get)(...) from `struct dpll_device_ops`
>> > 6) Fix patch [08/10]: rethink ice mutex locking scheme
>> > 7) Fix patch [09/10]: multiple comments on
>> > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/ZIQu+%2Fo4J0ZBspVg@nanopsycho/#t
>> > 8) add PPS DPLL phase offset to the netlink get-device API
>> >
>> > Thank you!
>> > Arkadiusz
>>
>> If someone has any objections please state them now, I will work on
>> all above except 5) and 7).
>> Vadim, could you take care of those 2 points?
>>
>Yeah, sure, I'll update 5 and 7.
>I'm not sure about 8) - do we really need this info, I believe every
>supported DPLL device exports PTP device as well. But I'm Ok to add this
>feature too.

Could you add the notification work while you are at it? I don't want
that to be forgotten. Thanks!

>
>> Thank you!
>> Arkadiusz
>