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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCBF4C4708E for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2022 13:10:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229853AbiLGNKt (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2022 08:10:49 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45432 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229850AbiLGNKr (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2022 08:10:47 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x635.google.com (mail-ej1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::635]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0121C56543 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2022 05:10:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x635.google.com with SMTP id x22so13810540ejs.11 for ; Wed, 07 Dec 2022 05:10:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=resnulli-us.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ou3Fk2Irg7eK6b3UgZwKC8kZv42UyPRCF5b6cACD0ek=; b=EOcoZ2gqOYri3OdNf2eWcBugPym4istQe0643ZN2qwHGnqbETuuiTVNmINAfKvTCAq +bDAXaLNv7TsiPwYbOLR2UJBEm9gFa9eXl+NP+KWr5NaS/hUrKHZMfHBRQBaseneJRL8 yJLmPKL3nt4+fS0kqHPKwIqyN1kXr8OQCEjjcrslq9b331+DsFCgwFxsSaiTzGGUuJzN qVLohUxswngg5r4Px4ggawMda66lbEyfSz3BDmQQ5j6XAiOVHtfv3TDLToZNUkGFI21L zEHiHNG17eoWeLIZdp1VUcwGX2Z/31FqfO/t7QXvC793WwnmWVDX0+TzAPvd0i+fxtw2 eaBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ou3Fk2Irg7eK6b3UgZwKC8kZv42UyPRCF5b6cACD0ek=; b=iktguCycWSe5UvnPH5GdQGuxWprnZ2ZjXytZgqN0qbEblgWjYOZU0nfdSdY21g8+Su lML+QPp1kug84rl0zSqYpub9pqmo0Lx7Dg1PRCiM8HuOI8jIVve+OqhW756vdHbpPzcI F9Xi5i232M0Lwo4Z9j/fa3Jwkp4K0wZG/z3xh3albdEkpFLqhYDIrwznbvdR7pLGWrt3 zpQmc7koKwA7wHenytgTKBw/Qy7jwTWwBOktHpujfUSJUoSCVf1Env7ouBRE3F1PXSoO 06uZwlnxg/BVqAKw5hSyezg0lVNvh7oP35NDCB9dmhwEweZeuIeH0CN0zp8v2GMUqfU/ z0wg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pnQlMxxDF+vyc+Wj9KGTV3rwxRphrqV31HOt0YzqDlJJFdH3JXT Hj2EXlSJgef+FP6af/VPrYILHg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf4C2loeS6wG8nSTXbNYNX13ovAzfSYxgB9gpooa66WdeXRavQ7+9LKyrDQmomGPeGEgLzuLaQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:bc4a:b0:7c0:eb36:5225 with SMTP id s10-20020a170906bc4a00b007c0eb365225mr12713164ejv.229.1670418644424; Wed, 07 Dec 2022 05:10:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (host-213-179-129-39.customer.m-online.net. [213.179.129.39]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r1-20020a1709061ba100b00779a605c777sm8488129ejg.192.2022.12.07.05.10.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 07 Dec 2022 05:10:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 14:10:42 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" , Vadim Fedorenko , Jonathan Lemon , Paolo Abeni , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Vadim Fedorenko , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, "Olech, Milena" , "Michalik, Michal" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 2/4] dpll: Add DPLL framework base functions Message-ID: References: <20221202212206.3619bd5f@kernel.org> <20221205161933.663ea611@kernel.org> <20221206092705.108ded86@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221206092705.108ded86@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 06:27:05PM CET, kuba@kernel.org wrote: >On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 09:50:19 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Yeah, that's a slightly tricky one. We'd probably need some form >>> of second order association. Easiest if we link it to a devlink >>> instance, I reckon. The OCP clock card does not have netdevs so we >>> can't follow the namespace of netdevs (which would be the second >>> option). >> >> Why do we need this association at all? > >Someone someday may want netns delegation and if we don't have the >support from the start we may break backward compat introducing it. Hmm. Can you imagine a usecase? Link to devlink instance btw might be a problem. In case of mlx5, one dpll instance is going to be created for 2 (or more) PFs. 1 per ConnectX ASIC as there is only 1 clock there. And PF devlinks can come and go, does not make sense to link it to any of them. Thinking about it a bit more, DPLL itself has no network notion. The special case is SyncE pin, which is linked to netdevice. Just a small part of dpll device. And the netdevice already has notion of netns. Isn't that enough?