RE: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins

[Y.b. Lu]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 10:00 PM
> To: Y.b. Lu <yangbo.lu@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; David S . Miller
> <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx>;
> Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@xxxxxxx>; Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>;
> Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@xxxxxxxxx>; Florian Fainelli
> <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>; Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] ptp_ocelot: support 4 programmable pins
> 
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 09:34:52AM +0000, Y.b. Lu wrote:
> > > Of course, that is horrible, and I am going to find a way to fix it.
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
> > Do you think it is ok to move protection into ptp_set_pinfunc() to protect
> just pin_config accessing?
> > ptp_disable_pinfunc() not touching pin_config could be out of protection.
> > But it seems indeed total ptp_set_pinfunc() should be under protection...
> 
> Yes, and I have way to fix that.  I will post a patch soon...
> 
> > I could modify commit messages to indicate the pin supports both
> PTP_PF_PEROUT and PTP_PF_EXTTS, and PTP_PF_EXTTS support will be added
> in the future.
> 
> Thanks for explaining.  Since you do have programmable pin, please
> wait for my patch to fix the deadlock.

Thanks a lot. Will wait your fix-up.

Best regards,
Yangbo Lu

> 
> Thanks,
> Richard