From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Petr Oros <poros@redhat.com>,
Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>,
Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] dpll: use pin owner's dpll ref for pin-level attribute setting
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 12:11:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed4deffe-1c0d-4f3a-8a78-80b6c41571fd@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260731141146.1119147-1-ivecera@redhat.com>
Reply to Sashiko findings:
> dpll_pin_is_freq_supported() reads a u64:
> u64 freq = nla_get_u64(a), old_freq;
> while the validator takes a u32:
> static bool dpll_pin_is_freq_supported(struct dpll_pin *pin, u32
freq)
> ...
> Would widening the helper parameter to u64 be worth folding in here?
Good catch. This is a pre-existing issue unrelated to the owner-ref
simplification. I'd prefer to fix it in a separate follow-up patch
rather than mixing it in.
> Should Documentation/driver-api/dpll.rst be updated in the same patch?
> ...
> Could both changes be mentioned in the commit message, which currently
> describes the patch only as removing "duplicate HW writes"?
Wull address in v2. Both dpll.rst sections ("Shared pins" and "SET
commands format") are updated. The commit message will describe the
-EOPNOTSUPP validation change (from scanning all owner-matching refs to
checking the single owner ref returned by dpll_pin_own_dpll_ref_first()).
> Is the ref_sync_set callback really DPLL-independent for zl3073x?
> ...
> does this leave the sync reference still armed as a selectable
> candidate in the priority tables of every other channel?
> ...
> If ref_sync_set does need per-registration invocation, should it keep
> the xa_for_each() fan-out while the other three setters move to the
> owner ref?
This is correct finding. zl3073x_dpll_input_pin_ref_sync_set() performs
a per-channel priority write that would only reach the first channel
after this simplification.
Rather than keeping xa_for_each() in the core for this one callback,
v2 will split the fix into a preparation patch (1/2) where the driver
itself iterates all DPLL channels via list_for_each_entry() and sets
priority to NONE on each one.
Ivan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 14:11 [PATCH net-next] dpll: use pin owner's dpll ref for pin-level attribute setting Ivan Vecera
2026-08-03 10:11 ` Ivan Vecera [this message]
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=ed4deffe-1c0d-4f3a-8a78-80b6c41571fd@redhat.com \
--to=ivecera@redhat.com \
--cc=arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--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