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

Vadim Fedorenko
2023-06-28T11:11:39Z

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.

> Thank you!
> Arkadiusz