From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.154.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 782D82C198; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 15:24:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.154.123 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705591457; cv=none; b=ESTozI7CidukO1zRRMJB1JZf7aTBAQj+73MKi53EGA6Yd0QGR4LuP0YdbMF8NceUYphPTfYXHadtDSdncIRcuSVdEXHcvdTi9BcIyHk0UCmYS6aT4dQ3+Vbhbyj9E7HN1hJT9xhpA/bUyOl7aiMndJwPo2GsXIVYkN9wgBHf67g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705591457; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EpEz591QpZ/Hd3izu39M5yvfIQZ2SywK/sJKu7P4pXg=; h=DKIM-Signature:X-CSE-ConnectionGUID:X-CSE-MsgGUID:X-IronPort-AV: X-Amp-Result:Received:Received:Received:Date:From:To:CC:Subject: Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rUl07/d9LtNZAEIScxZCB8W/qnFkvaN/VHpHvqwsoSp87JLEP8MXKxQnMClrfaY+DS3dvZrDFfK6xA7KTcP4xS03oTg74brUx49nCxEqB1iUCQnpAqszDhYZ/bCAFdJD+KYBtLePZCCBZtWq+lr8vSElYj8SQc75Jc2CLxSlANY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=microchip.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=microchip.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=microchip.com header.i=@microchip.com header.b=M8GFV3eE; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.154.123 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=microchip.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=microchip.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=microchip.com header.i=@microchip.com header.b="M8GFV3eE" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1705591455; x=1737127455; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=EpEz591QpZ/Hd3izu39M5yvfIQZ2SywK/sJKu7P4pXg=; b=M8GFV3eEURYKeNF+OpBQr8O6Oi+JOLg1+vCbOsuoNIxiFOiCMqt4sqLb YtHrSW5nx/4euGJrippDeD8+LfWTiRsmDnvW9npk6a9OyAtzl1a2R+F2t Yf1Ri5jvCa3ornRTNuadRt0GYUWFTD64oQPThEMDrFOrszX3HbeWUX/Be q2l+5/X/b55fshUhvrb8PMpK0j5YxGtuF48UE4FLGBfOH8YOTzGoXEOSD 7UDgQbfS78p7u/Nll7nQdmCZq2lgftwj6qUEV1XAXg9htwNw4uJqVfWvm K+gbi8nO1xfGx904Z0+BoM4PhA5RglrONI04/dJBh4+icPo2oC0Jsnvkm w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Al980YKDS2y1LYrm50ovYw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 2tV3QeeCQZ2Ql97vyE0pug== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,203,1701154800"; d="scan'208";a="14943914" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa4.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 18 Jan 2024 08:24:13 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) by chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:23:54 -0700 Received: from localhost (10.10.85.11) by chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.2507.35 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:23:54 -0700 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:23:53 +0100 From: Horatiu Vultur To: Andrew Lunn CC: , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] net: micrel: Fix set/get PHC time for lan8814 Message-ID: <20240118152353.syk3v7kgf3mutqpp@DEN-DL-M31836.microchip.com> References: <20240118085916.1204354-1-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> <20240118085916.1204354-3-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> <6fa37dfd-3c92-4842-9785-1b17bbbedc9d@lunn.ch> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6fa37dfd-3c92-4842-9785-1b17bbbedc9d@lunn.ch> The 01/18/2024 14:52, Andrew Lunn wrote: Hi Andrew, > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 09:59:16AM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote: > > When setting or getting PHC time, the higher bits of the second time (>32 > > bits) they were ignored. Meaning that setting some time in the future like > > year 2150, it was failing to set this. > > Stable rules say: > > It must either fix a real bug that bothers people... > > Do we have users of this device in 2150? No, and it is not like a customer raise this issue because they have some special cases. It was me who discover it by accident and I found it annoying not being able to do something that is that simple. I mean, I just want to set the time and then be able to read it back. > > Maybe submit this for net-next? Anyway, I don't have strong feelings about this, if it goes to net or net-next, I just want to fix this at some point :) > > Andrew -- /Horatiu