From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Desouza, Ederson Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 00:27:55 +0000 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH next-queue v1 2/2] igc: enable auxiliary PHC functions for the i225 In-Reply-To: <4a11d17d2b0b2e297de1e42fb76db076e9940712.camel@intel.com> References: <20210212014212.41570-1-ederson.desouza@intel.com> <20210212014212.41570-3-ederson.desouza@intel.com> <4a11d17d2b0b2e297de1e42fb76db076e9940712.camel@intel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 23:53 +0000, Nguyen, Anthony L wrote: > On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 11:05 +0100, Paul Menzel wrote: > > Dear Ederson, > > > > > > Am 12.02.21 um 02:42 schrieb Ederson de Souza: > > > The i225 device offers a number of special PTP Hardware Clock > > > features on > > > the Software Defined Pins (SDPs). This patch adds support for two > > > of the > > > possible functions, namely time stamping external events, and > > > periodic > > > output signals. > > > > > > The assignment of PHC functions to the four SDP can be freely > > > chosen by > > > the user. > > > > > > While i225 allows up to four timers to be used to source the time > > > used > > > on the external events or output signals, this patch uses only one > > > of > > > those timers. > > > > Why is that? Because it?s simpler to implement? Please add the reason > > to > > the commit message. > > I've applied this patch so testing can be done, but I agree with Paul. > Some detail on why only one timer is being used would be nice. > > Also, there are quite a few check/warnings from checkpatch that look > like they can easily be remedied. Sure, I'll address the review comments and checks and send a v2 soon. Thanks for the reviews! > > Thanks, > Tony