On Thu, 2025-07-24 at 21:09 -0700, Richard Cochran wrote:

On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 02:56:56PM +0300, David Arinzon wrote:

quoted

The first objective focuses on the use case where the PHC device
is fully managed. The ENA driver, for example, exposes a PHC
device, whose synchronization status and quality is maintained
without any user-space application. This new ioctl reports on the
clock accuracy and status of the PHC device to user-space
applications, where ptp4l and similar are not available.

This seems pretty rare.  I can't think of any other hardware that
makes claims about synchronization quality.

So this ioctl would be just for one device.

The vmclock enlightenment also exposes the same information.

David, your RFC should probably have included that implementation
shouldn't it?