From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E6AC433EF for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 21:31:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232465AbhLIVel (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:34:41 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50692 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232430AbhLIVeb (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:34:31 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D72EC0617A1 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 13:30:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id k64so6577706pfd.11 for ; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:30:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=4bSfNnt3pQHgrCp4l3BL89LcNqI2ZvMGSV9huZ/Grv4=; b=WIHpK8/1o2oS8sG+8A/qBPAkfeip+PDgI0IzGWJ8a+3uF2By+v1/ZRoqyvJEzGh0+w EblFzhoFHVaRjYOAuTfQX4wt1YNqzUjKIN9obgJO3vSJZpGjF1+LkJrHJ6QSfvUcYAeU JVMfQB0jBzLVI6vnCVzWOjHFCgtRkQFiPJnNJUzqgyWPXvCsicU4e6BIo5OQqSrAlTaH /93/0NXM9Uwno6tCNzoHrd2glywVsjXxZrhEuJWmVqzYRLoVUzNJawVGR9yyMXgkVvJa B2R2dQX10esNXNpe7NG0i/TYQvtM/WsM+kL0U9ADGZmsLWZ/2AGzEZ+ZF5+el2ys/qQ6 xrwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=4bSfNnt3pQHgrCp4l3BL89LcNqI2ZvMGSV9huZ/Grv4=; b=794ttBJQEfJgZFVJlXTCq0MpcEWQLsRJmHIYB8GbPZx/sXOJ55XD5O400EDAyV/k9o ZFLJI634UOAKYyoPbpOvmkl+dSL0XgdIzAD6U0MjF1zBSjYxZDhdfDP6fRPGksv9g1Ry L8P622M3JgJIge/6v/U8ooGNoqJceB+4bsMPwCS/Ux9bAyccnbZLjMZKMsTI9zfci9Q1 u1nmE0MLlP5YGrvi35remjBZqU+kHV3yxRl+mOBzra3KglCHSh7F62QMaP0Tj/Msuri2 atWy5loooeoT46TmkpZnJgm7XswMldr70Nat8ZpkIkQEVUyTof0GgyVleMovv9/tWYDb +9FQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5336rVRnV1BsXbsIyWRqnGMr7DQV9L2T4gtugGPHhRGxXyS1Vj8E +k80wUDluJ00FIepOTJLvSg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJziNCUo4WM7NHQROf9Va4cwNYrLxkAQJLXw34X8yJxzlDeHmOGVrSP4WKPae3a0xcKMI0K0WQ== X-Received: by 2002:a62:1c0e:0:b0:4a0:3492:37b5 with SMTP id c14-20020a621c0e000000b004a0349237b5mr13910158pfc.33.1639085457103; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:30:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from hoboy.vegasvil.org ([2601:640:8200:33:e2d5:5eff:fea5:802f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f7sm38041pfj.41.2021.12.09.13.30.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:30:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 13:30:53 -0800 From: Richard Cochran To: Hangbin Liu Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh , Veaceslav Falico , Andy Gospodarek , "David S . Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Heiner Kallweit Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net_tstamp: add new flag HWTSTAMP_FLAGS_UNSTABLE_PHC Message-ID: <20211209213053.GD21819@hoboy.vegasvil.org> References: <20211208044224.1950323-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> <20211208044224.1950323-2-liuhangbin@gmail.com> <20211208152022.GB18344@hoboy.vegasvil.org> <20211209212258.GB21819@hoboy.vegasvil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211209212258.GB21819@hoboy.vegasvil.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 01:22:58PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 12:31:30PM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 07:20:22AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote: > > > I guess that the original intent of hwtstamp_config.flags was for user > > > space to SET flags that it wanted. > > > Now this has become a place for drivers to return values back. > > > > I think it's a flag that when uses want phc index of bond. > > There is no affect for other drivers. It only affect bond interfaces. > > When this flag set, it means users want to get the info from bond. > > > > Do I missed something? > > No, I simply mean that the input/output direction of the bit in the > flags should be clear. > > - User space will not set this bit, only read it. > - Drivers may set this bit, but if user sets it, it is an error. Oh, I am confused. Your patch does this: - if user sets bit, then return bonded index - otherwise, return EOPNOTSUPP That is fine with me. Thanks, Richard