Re: [PATCH net-next v5 14/22] ethtool: provide timestamping information in GET_INFO request

Florian Fainelli
2019-03-28T03:37:02Z

On 3/25/2019 10:08 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> Add timestamping information as provided by ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO ioctl
> command in GET_INFO reply if ETH_INFO_IM_TSINFO flag is set in the request.
>
> Add constants for counts of HWTSTAMP_TX_* and HWTSTAM_FILTER_* constants
> and provide symbolic names for timestamping related values so that they can
> be retrieved in GET_STRSET and GET_INFO requests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
> ---

[snip]

> +int __ethtool_get_ts_info(struct net_device *dev, struct ethtool_ts_info *info)
> +{
> + const struct ethtool_ops *ops = dev->ethtool_ops;
> + struct phy_device *phydev = dev->phydev;
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + memset(info, 0, sizeof(*info));
> + info->cmd = ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO;
> +
> + if (phydev && phydev->drv && phydev->drv->ts_info) {
> + err = phydev->drv->ts_info(phydev, info);
> + } else if (ops->get_ts_info) {
> + err = ops->get_ts_info(dev, info);
> + } else {
> + info->so_timestamping = SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE |
> + SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE;
> + info->phc_index = -1;
> + }

We don't have to solve this just yet, but this is the type of logic that
we want to be able to change in the future, there are a number of things
in the current ethtool code where, say, we always prefer PHY time
stamping over MAC time stamping when there should be a choice if both
are supported.

I don't know if you maintain a TODO for after when this patch series get
merged, but we may want to start one :)
--
Florian