Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/1] ptp: clockmatrix: support 32-bit address space
From: Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@nvidia.com>
Date: 2023-11-22 18:34:13
Also in:
lkml
On Wed, 15 Nov, 2023 10:10:53 -0500 Min Li [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk
From: Min Li <redacted> We used to assume 0x2010xxxx address. Now that we need to access 0x2011xxxx address, we need to support read/write the whole 32-bit address space. Signed-off-by: Min Li <redacted> --- - Drop MAX_ABS_WRITE_PHASE_PICOSECONDS advised by Rahul - Apply SCSR_ADDR to scrach register in idtcm_load_firmware advised by Simon - Apply u32 to base in idtcm_output_enable advised by Simon - Correct sync_ctrl0/1 parameter position for idtcm_write advised by Simon drivers/ptp/ptp_clockmatrix.c | 71 ++-- drivers/ptp/ptp_clockmatrix.h | 32 +- include/linux/mfd/idt8a340_reg.h | 542 ++++++++++++++++--------------- 3 files changed, 331 insertions(+), 314 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_clockmatrix.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_clockmatrix.c index f6f9d4adce04..1d5da77502e6 100644 --- a/drivers/ptp/ptp_clockmatrix.c +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_clockmatrix.c
<snip>
quoted hunk
@@ -1705,7 +1720,7 @@ static s32 idtcm_getmaxphase(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp __always_unused) } /* - * Internal function for implementing support for write phase offset + * Maximum absolute value for write phase offset in picoseconds
This documentation comment is wrong (this is meant for idtcm_getmaxphase). I think you might be generating patches without rebasing on the latest net-next tree?
quoted hunk
* * @channel: channel * @delta_ns: delta in nanoseconds@@ -1717,6 +1732,7 @@ static int _idtcm_adjphase(struct idtcm_channel *channel, s32 delta_ns) u8 i; u8 buf[4] = {0}; s32 phase_50ps; + s64 offset_ps; if (channel->mode != PTP_PLL_MODE_WRITE_PHASE) { err = channel->configure_write_phase(channel);@@ -1724,7 +1740,8 @@ static int _idtcm_adjphase(struct idtcm_channel *channel, s32 delta_ns) return err; } - phase_50ps = div_s64((s64)delta_ns * 1000, 50); + offset_ps = (s64)delta_ns * 1000; + phase_50ps = div_s64(offset_ps, 50);
Sorry, I am not sure what this change has to do with 32-bit address space support. Seems like this was introduced due to not rebasing properly on top of latest changes?
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
buf[i] = phase_50ps & 0xff;<snip> -- Thanks, Rahul Rameshbabu