Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Petr Oros <poros@redhat.com>,
	Chris du Quesnay <Chris.duQuesnay@microchip.com>,
	Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
	Min Li <min.li@microchip.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
	Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 2/3] dpll: zl3073x: add channel ToD, phase step and TIE operations
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 14:21:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4713be61-9c2d-4799-a88a-db8e3eb33021@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260809182340.1081610-3-ivecera@redhat.com>

Sashiko findings with replies:

 > Should the kernel-doc match what the function actually does here?
 > [case 0 returns without testing SEM]

Will restructure tod_ready_wait to check the SEM bit first. If SEM
is clear, no operation is pending and we can return 0 immediately
regardless of the CMD field value. This also handles the unknown-CMD
case from a prior boot stage gracefully — if the semaphore is clear,
whatever CMD bits remain are stale and irrelevant.

 > The documented return list [...] does not mention -EOPNOTSUPP.

Will update the return documentation.

 > Can this loop exhaust its 20 retries on healthy hardware and return
 > -EBUSY?

Testing shows that a single iteration of the loop body (two ToD
reads) takes approximately 17-19 ms. With 20 retries that gives a
budget of 340-380 ms, which is more than enough to outlast the 20 ms
margin window near a 1 Hz edge. After the edge crosses, the next
read returns ~980 ms of margin and the loop breaks immediately.

 > How is the measured margin guaranteed to still hold when the
 > WR_NEXT_1HZ command finally reaches the device? [...]
 > Would a post-write confirmation [...] be worth adding?

The 20 ms threshold provides sufficient margin for the write
sequence (ready wait + three register writes + command). A post-write
confirmation would add complexity for a scenario that requires ~20 ms
of preemption under a mutex, which is unreachable in practice.

 > The kernel-doc says delta_ns "must be within +-1s", which reads as an
 > inclusive bound, while the guard accepts only the open interval

Will reword to clarify the exclusive bound.

 > The ToD ready wait logic fails permanently if the hardware control
 > register inherits an unknown command from a prior boot stage.

Addressed by the SEM-first restructuring described above. If SEM is
clear, the function returns 0 regardless of the CMD bits.

Thanks,
Ivan


  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-11 12:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-09 18:23 [PATCH net-next v6 0/3] dpll: zl3073x: add PTP clock support Ivan Vecera
2026-08-09 18:23 ` [PATCH net-next v6 1/3] dpll: zl3073x: scale poll interval proportionally to timeout Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:19   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:20   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-09 18:23 ` [PATCH net-next v6 2/3] dpll: zl3073x: add channel ToD, phase step and TIE operations Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:21   ` Ivan Vecera [this message]
2026-08-11 12:22   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-09 18:23 ` [PATCH net-next v6 3/3] dpll: zl3073x: add PTP clock support Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:25   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:26   ` Ivan Vecera

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4713be61-9c2d-4799-a88a-db8e3eb33021@redhat.com \
    --to=ivecera@redhat.com \
    --cc=Chris.duQuesnay@microchip.com \
    --cc=arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=min.li@microchip.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=poros@redhat.com \
    --cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox