From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6ACC43331 for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 05:36:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECFAD20674 for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 05:36:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="UrbyERNh" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2392387AbfIFFgB (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Sep 2019 01:36:01 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]:37369 "EHLO mail-pl1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2392368AbfIFFgA (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Sep 2019 01:36:00 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id b10so2579055plr.4; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 22:36:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Vhdxc4ZQN68NuRvF/4TxwiVsBNkRj8a+6R5dyH9hgtQ=; b=UrbyERNhnioC9vM34TKgslxPC9GDfQAzTuSQw1mIryRCBUBREBB3hRfMeTRKB3RKwN zaeC1a0uYHuXi+N/QuPzAkGCJklAb5Pp7HS/M/tySpADiIZ2yynwvXPSkfbp612R3rCV 7j4rcZuODuOl1kFW4R+pvyrMSRSVtqIVPHRl4tcyctkiOm/t4o9h4D+vSb1bvg8vAgRt 0voKOxH55NyFoUcR3vu6R69BK6sxvO/tMATBib7tjmotXSif/9/doHVZMYHhq3PStpXC fQDuoH+SZOkyp1TEnoizNbtOPuPFc2F7ZcDVeQOGokj8h1cPYnVa2X3dhlcdvBCeYebb htGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Vhdxc4ZQN68NuRvF/4TxwiVsBNkRj8a+6R5dyH9hgtQ=; b=fbMC7e50rkPjzx0UvRwEaAjwRMuqdrn/kzvmWWkOoTERtYenZYB3qqJtgYCkLMuP5h YgHsNGbrzeVXCidwEGJp1amBb6mASmhIXi5+piX0iIuJQn7GbQ1lqOP4Ea0txzFZiYWa OoPaFltEfKiS3KMj3ECbPx5ukFnSZZvrQWliTqV3ncXYOR5rJmS0ZGz+Ct5wlCTcZs51 7sHI3zCDZa6ARB82j9yNlVZPKyouHYxPggPj0BLcBGAZkgrJ3QFQmjFvjddy+mwx1O5E pcoGxzIwaRZwcKqfBXQh3MRnUoP96QdfI4zBob/p5eUIycBTO1MXiemRDqBZUVkMKOCQ 4RLA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXkw7FYIjBLkyrlsrXgDngB8a0QVWbTox78H+C4heQ7c4IU4Zl/ k1crL/Pbj3uinuhWiQn0PqE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwGOW6Dpz2/9KfdUuRutFfvd8nZK3snjg8Bnj4/+KQGpsMsMmWnW43raxny+4AGWGhjfFy/GQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f301:: with SMTP id gb1mr7279804plb.249.1567748159836; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 22:35:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c-73-222-71-142.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.222.71.142]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v12sm3671516pgr.86.2019.09.05.22.35.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 05 Sep 2019 22:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 22:35:56 -0700 From: Richard Cochran To: Felipe Balbi Cc: Christopher S Hall , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] PTP: add support for one-shot output Message-ID: <20190906053556.GB1422@localhost> References: <20190829095825.2108-1-felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com> <20190829095825.2108-2-felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com> <20190829172509.GB2166@localhost> <20190829172848.GC2166@localhost> <87r253ulpn.fsf@gmail.com> <20190831144732.GA1692@localhost> <87h85roy9p.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87h85roy9p.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 01:03:46PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > This a bit confusing, really. Specially when the comment right above > those flags states: > > /* PTP_xxx bits, for the flags field within the request structures. */ Agreed, it is confusing. Go ahead and remove this comment. > Seems like we will, at least, make it clear which flags are valid for > which request structures. Yes, please do make it as clear as you can. Thanks, Richard