Re: [RFC PATCH v9 00/10] Create common DPLL configuration API

[Jiri Pirko]

Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 12:07:30PM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 1:16 PM
>>Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 11:15:11AM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 12:18 PM
>>>>
>>>>Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 02:38:10PM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>v8 -> v9:
>>>>
>>>>Could you please address all the unresolved issues from v8 and send v10?
>>>>I'm not reviewing this one.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks!
>>>
>>>Sure, will do, but first missing to-do/discuss list:
>>>1) remove mode_set as not used by any driver
>
>I have implemented in ice (also added back the DPLL_MODE_FREERUN).

Uh :/ Why exactly is it needed in this initial submission?


>
>>>2) remove "no-added-value" static functions descriptions in
>>>   dpll_core/dpll_netlink
>
>Removed.
>
>>>3) merge patches [ 03/10, 04/10, 05/10 ] into patches that are compiling
>>>   after each patch apply
>
>Hope Vadim will decide on this, the thing is merging in two patches
>doesn't make much sense as there won't be any linking until both patches
>are there, so most sense it would be if 3 are merged into one, but
>then we will be back to one big blob patch issue.
>
>>>4) remove function return values descriptions/lists
>
>Fixed.
>
>>>5) Fix patch [05/10]:
>>>   - status Supported
>>>   - additional maintainers
>>>   - remove callback:
>>>     int (*source_pin_idx_get)(...) from `struct dpll_device_ops`
>>>6) Fix patch [08/10]: rethink ice mutex locking scheme
>
>Fixed.
>
>>>7) Fix patch [09/10]: multiple comments on
>>>https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/ZIQu+%2Fo4J0ZBspVg@nanopsycho/#t
>>>8) add PPS DPLL phase offset to the netlink get-device API
>>>
>
>Added few things on this matter
>- 1 dpll level attribute:
>  - phase-shift - measuring the phase difference between dpll input
>    and it's output
>- 1 dpll-pin tuple level attribute:
>  - pin-phase-adjust - set/get phase adjust of a pin on a dpll
>- 2 pin level attributes:
>  - pin-phase-adjust-min - provide user with min value that can be set
>  - pin-phase-adjust-max - provide user with max value that can be set
>- a constant:
>  - DPLL_PHASE_SHIFT_DIVIDER similar to DPLL_TEMP_DIVIDER for producing
>    fraction value of measured DPLL_A_PHASE_SHIFT

Again, why do we need this in this initial submission? Why it can't be a
follow-up patchset to extend this? This way we never converge :/
Please focus on what we have now and bring it in. Let the extensions to
be addressed later on, please.



>- implemented in dpll netlink and in ice
>
>>
>>You are missing removal of pin->prop.package_label = dev_name(dev); in
>>ice.
>>
>
>I didn't touch it, as we still need to discuss it, Jakub didn't respond
>on v8 thread.
>I don't see why we shall not name it the way. This is most meaningful
>label for those pins for the user right now.

This is not meaningful, at all. dev_name() changes upon which pci slot
you plug the card into. package_label should be an actual label on a
silicon package. Why you think this two are related in aby way, makes me
really wonder. Could you elaborate the meaningfulness of this?


>
>Thank you!
>Arkadiusz
>
>>
>>>Thank you!
>>>Arkadiusz