Thread (19 messages) 19 messages, 7 authors, 2013-05-29

Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] igb: enable auxiliary PHC functions for the i210.

From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Date: 2013-05-28 16:23:36

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 03:58:07PM +0000, Vick, Matthew wrote:
On 5/27/13 2:21 AM, "Richard Cochran" [off-list ref] wrote:
 
I would prefer it if we did a MAC check before these two TSICR checks,
since we're making some assumptions about the hardware within the
interrupt cases. At the very least, a comment that these are only
applicable to I210/I211 would be nice.
I can respin with a comment that the additional bits are i210 only. I
think this is better than adding more checks into ISR. Since we only
enable these bits for the i210, the checks would be redundant.
quoted
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
index 5944de0..8cf4b8a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
@@ -23,6 +23,15 @@
#include "igb.h"

+static int igb_input_sdp = 0;
+static int igb_output_sdp = 1;
+module_param(igb_input_sdp, int, 0444);
+module_param(igb_output_sdp, int, 0444);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(igb_input_sdp,
+		 "The SDP used as an input, to time stamp external events");
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(igb_output_sdp,
+		 "The SDP used to output the programmable periodic signal");
+
Is there any other mechanism we could use to control this? I would imagine
not, but I know module parameters are generally frowned upon.
This the way I handled it for the PHYTER, and I think it is the best
way from our three choices:

1. kconfig option (inflexible)
2. module param
3. ethtool (can o'worms)
quoted
@@ -711,6 +800,68 @@ int igb_ptp_hwtstamp_ioctl(struct net_device *netdev,
		-EFAULT : 0;
}

+static int igb_sdp_init(struct igb_adapter *adapter)
+{
+	struct e1000_hw *hw = &adapter->hw;
+	u32 ctrl, ctrl_ext, tssdp = 0;
+
+	if (igb_input_sdp == igb_output_sdp) {
+		pr_err("SDP %d set as both input and output\n", igb_input_sdp);
+		return -1;
Shouldn't this return -EINVAL?
Maybe we don't need the return value at all. Just the message is
important, I think.
 
quoted
@@ -785,6 +936,10 @@ void igb_ptp_init(struct igb_adapter *adapter)
		struct timespec ts = ktime_to_timespec(ktime_get_real());

		igb_ptp_settime_i210(&adapter->ptp_caps, &ts);
+		igb_sdp_init(adapter);
What if igb_sdp_init fails?
Hmm, maybe we should then disable the extra features... will consider
for V2.
quoted
+		adapter->ptp_caps.n_ext_ts = 1;
+		adapter->ptp_caps.n_per_out = 1;
+		adapter->ptp_caps.pps = 1;
Thanks,
Richard
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help