On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 4:05 PM Arun Ramadoss
<arun.ramadoss@microchip.com> wrote:

> +static int ksz_ptp_enable(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp,
> +                         struct ptp_clock_request *req, int on)
> +{
> +       struct ksz_ptp_data *ptp_data = ptp_caps_to_data(ptp);
> +       struct ksz_device *dev = ptp_data_to_ksz_dev(ptp_data);
> +       struct ptp_perout_request *request = &req->perout;
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       switch (req->type) {
> +       case PTP_CLK_REQ_PEROUT:
> +               if (request->index > ptp->n_per_out)
> +                       return -EINVAL;

Should be -EOPNOTSUPP ? I see some other places where -EOPNOTSUPP is
more appropriate.

> +
> +               mutex_lock(&ptp_data->lock);
> +               ret = ksz_ptp_enable_perout(dev, request, on);
> +               mutex_unlock(&ptp_data->lock);
> +               break;
> +       default:
> +               return -EINVAL;
> +       }
> +
> +       return ret;
> +}
> +
>  /*  Function is pointer to the do_aux_work in the ptp_clock capability */
>  static long ksz_ptp_do_aux_work(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp)
>  {
> @@ -508,6 +823,8 @@ static const struct ptp_clock_info ksz_ptp_caps = {
>         .adjfine        = ksz_ptp_adjfine,
>         .adjtime        = ksz_ptp_adjtime,
>         .do_aux_work    = ksz_ptp_do_aux_work,
> +       .enable         = ksz_ptp_enable,
> +       .n_per_out      = 3,
>  };
>