RE: [net-next 11/13] igb: Update PTP function names/variables and locations.

-----Original Message-----
From: Keller, Jacob E
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:48 AM
To: Vick, Matthew; Richard Cochran
Cc: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; davem@davemloft.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org;
gospo@redhat.com; sassmann@redhat.com
Subject: RE: [net-next 11/13] igb: Update PTP function names/variables
and locations.

[...]

The history isn't lost, it is just obscured. I agree if the change is
necessary it should be done. I think we all disagree on what is
necessary. I would prefer function names to match. Richard has a point
regarding the time stamping all packets, however again the ioctl
turning that on tends to be quite PTP centric already. I think that
value isn't necessarily added due to the current coupling of the
features. It is partially coupled by the hardware anyways.

Effectively with the PTP framework disabled you have a half useful
feature that is enabled by a strange ioctl that has a lot of PTP
specific names, and doesn't always do what you want.

I am not sure how much work would be required to get to a state where
the separation of function makes sense.

- Jake

Fair point about the history.

Since these functions are tightly coupled with PTP, it makes sense to call them that for now. Long-term, I completely agree with Richard--once the function is independent of PTP, we should give it a generic name. 

Cheers,
Matthew