Hi Sergei,

Subject: RE: [RFC/PATCH 02/18] ravb: Rename the variables
"no_ptp_cfg_active" and "ptp_cfg_active"

Hi Sergei,

quoted

Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 02/18] ravb: Rename the variables
"no_ptp_cfg_active" and "ptp_cfg_active"

On 9/23/21 7:35 PM, Biju Das wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

Rename the variable "no_ptp_cfg_active" with "no_gptp" with
inverted checks and "ptp_cfg_active" with "ccc_gac".

   That's not exactly rename, no? At least for the 1st case...

This is what we agreed as per last discussion[1].

https://jpn01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpa
tc
hwork.kernel.org%2Fproject%2Flinux-renesas-soc%2Fpatch%2F20210825070
15
4.14336-5-biju.das.jz%40bp.renesas.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cbiju.das.
jz%40bp.renesas.com%7Cec41661b87e14f9e810808d97ebbae07%7C53d82571da1
94
7e49cb4625a166a4a2a%7C0%7C0%7C637680166814248680%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZ
sb
3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3
D%
7C1000&sdata=ze0ica0K57exFOSQ9LyMuQ%2FFimvOW4PtH8ETxYJ8o6Y%3D&am
p;
reserved=0

   Sorry, I've changed my mind about 'no_gpgp' after seeing all the
checks. I'd like to avoiud the double negations in those checks --
this should make the code more clear. My 1st idea (just 'gp[tp')
turned out to be more practical, sorry about this going
back-and-forth. :-<

So Just to confirm the name to be used are "ccc_gac" and "gptp".

Case 1) On R-Car Gen3, gPTP support is active in config mode. (replace
"ptp_cfg_active" with "ccc_gac") Case 2) On R-Car Gen2, gPTP support is
not active in config mode ( replace "no_ptp_cfg_active" with "gptp") Case
3) RZ/G2L does not support the gPTP feature(if "no_gac" or "gptp" then it
falls to case 3).

As per the above discussion, I have prepared a new patch.

Regards,
Biju