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
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 2/3] dpll: zl3073x: add channel ToD, phase step and TIE operations
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 16:47:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c89e4e6-8dd8-4353-9354-1f85eb17fbc9@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260814082656.306534-3-ivecera@redhat.com>
Sashiko comments with my replies:
> Can this loop spin out its retry budget without ever giving the
> condition a chance to become true? [...]
> On a fast bus where the ToD command completes before the semaphore
> is re-read, all 20 iterations can finish well inside the 20 ms window
Testing on I2C at both 100 kHz and 400 kHz shows that a single
iteration takes approximately 17-19 ms regardless of bus speed.
The iteration time is dominated by the device's internal processing
of the ToD read commands, not bus transfer time. With 20 retries
the budget is 340-380 ms, well beyond the 20 ms margin window.
> the kerneldoc for zl3073x_chan_tie_write() states delta_ns "must be
> in (-1s, 1s)" and nothing in the function enforces it. [...]
> Would an explicit range check on delta_ns be worth adding here?
Both in-tree callers already bound the input as you noted. The range
guard was intentionally removed in this version at the reviewer's
request — the internal API should trust its callers rather than
re-validate inputs already checked by the PTP core. The kernel-doc
documents the precondition for future callers.
Thanks,
Ivan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-16 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-14 8:26 [PATCH net-next v8 0/3] dpll: zl3073x: add PTP clock support Ivan Vecera
2026-08-14 8:26 ` [PATCH net-next v8 1/3] dpll: zl3073x: scale poll interval proportionally to timeout Ivan Vecera
2026-08-14 8:26 ` [PATCH net-next v8 2/3] dpll: zl3073x: add channel ToD, phase step and TIE operations Ivan Vecera
2026-08-16 14:47 ` Ivan Vecera [this message]
2026-08-18 16:37 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-18 16:51 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 8:26 ` [PATCH net-next v8 3/3] dpll: zl3073x: add PTP clock support Ivan Vecera
2026-08-16 14:52 ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-18 16:37 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-18 17:00 ` [PATCH net-next v8 0/3] " patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=9c89e4e6-8dd8-4353-9354-1f85eb17fbc9@redhat.com \
--to=ivecera@redhat.com \
--cc=Chris.duQuesnay@microchip.com \
--cc=arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=kuba@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=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