From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E9B433E3
	for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 13 Jun 2023 16:38:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04ABDC433D9;
	Tue, 13 Jun 2023 16:38:01 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org;
	s=k20201202; t=1686674284;
	bh=bma3arsPpRb//8pgoNM3rtYZA2qY8vvDp0ehgi/2gxk=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=m02aDZlxwJWg1TkGHhSEydUAGQyDn4VxaaFu+EAhFrOxQMpNTldfJGa9j8xIBoG3+
	 dxsatRKFdTMSBGr5VzPwoFEcxZ3BSi6jf5hud+okZsVHlU4ppKQrtlHqhW01LP4Fsm
	 EPXKjnT/ftGpTf2OYAolq6OVhZY/CIgv7+xZ1W3PofzoctoQR+xbCs7QTaodX8F2Zr
	 We9aC2q6rKEWOG3svpB2gaZmG3164+4RsciO/5PyySG+bDzw/oJJsB/wZrCEb+5K8n
	 hKOX0x1y0Gy9452eBu2wfBOD3Eu3zkyv9YESl18ZnxR2IgRY/PH6xC2TOsfSb6tm1D
	 X9ZdgJgd/PDyw==
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 09:38:01 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Cc: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>, vadfed@meta.com,
 jonathan.lemon@gmail.com, pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net,
 davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, vadfed@fb.com,
 jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, saeedm@nvidia.com,
 leon@kernel.org, richardcochran@gmail.com, sj@kernel.org,
 javierm@redhat.com, ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com, mst@redhat.com,
 tzimmermann@suse.de, michal.michalik@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
 jacek.lawrynowicz@linux.intel.com, airlied@redhat.com, ogabbay@kernel.org,
 arnd@arndb.de, nipun.gupta@amd.com, axboe@kernel.dk, linux@zary.sk,
 masahiroy@kernel.org, benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com,
 geert+renesas@glider.be, milena.olech@intel.com, kuniyu@amazon.com,
 liuhangbin@gmail.com, hkallweit1@gmail.com, andy.ren@getcruise.com,
 razor@blackwall.org, idosch@nvidia.com, lucien.xin@gmail.com,
 nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com, phil@nwl.cc, claudiajkang@gmail.com,
 linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 netdev@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
 linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 poros@redhat.com, mschmidt@redhat.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
 vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] dpll: documentation on DPLL subsystem
 interface
Message-ID: <20230613093801.735cd341@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZIg8/0UJB9Lbyx2D@nanopsycho>
References: <20230609121853.3607724-1-arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>
	<20230609121853.3607724-2-arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>
	<20230612154329.7bd2d52f@kernel.org>
	<ZIg8/0UJB9Lbyx2D@nanopsycho>
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:netdev+subscribe@vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:netdev+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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"?
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.