From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.153.233]) (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 634B328DA1; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 08:21:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.153.233 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705652488; cv=none; b=E6qgOiQ8HAPvQ4TK1EpTRmmkA5HwUKpmMzD7r2pYnrYBGC1/K/yrRGVgJ5y5onewdJM1Hh2ZHuFWpAZ2U2yXEcNaAuHIB0CXWxBqpuqSFHY+rqLOY0V+TMMFj+uTGLvGVs/GrRlNV4OgD0Uqq34YoFTFDx9m85DHNRcGwGTI85Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705652488; c=relaxed/simple; bh=r0lBl+LKAGRixf+QLXYXEETCshZa5OordGtzi06BNuI=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=tb+IPQww8wHraOIv2jJ8M6eN21zn6YGXUO2r6GCQC2OlGcdTsfmz7FVzqZiJxVxMEDspU/Vz5JUumDzTsfd8QRsGGDB/YgaxnWISp7EbtIy08PQBM2FHVGn05gRjLN1urT5hoBTAzYJHvWhIdMJ+fhG/QhR79QEftlWpAiGFw3s= 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=A+kKV2gb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.153.233 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="A+kKV2gb" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1705652486; x=1737188486; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=r0lBl+LKAGRixf+QLXYXEETCshZa5OordGtzi06BNuI=; b=A+kKV2gb24Sz6ElKPaW1TXisavCCNgLZn0iHgjfonXp4lAdAegig9b1I HRviOcp2CgvJIrDTaqSIVUNRxAwPQItofz+bOWrXwoLlDSpO1ER3pnU0/ jnertpwXzxThR5m4P9eamSqBKsg5VgSzG6i8u6FN4NPAGX+egZpoiotCL o9NUoZtXJulf2cFgvQDtt5sNfj7aMKAS0EzM/MaPXmBo65IhWwQDR8H+N RpNp8eosju3pu3Wt/HmjHyNqMqd7Li4/qFApXAJzODEorEsXC9oo5XazG 7St8pur1VHMls68oWZW7RMMcwLSTaEKFjOUTxhk8FlkrB4RfSmwYhb9ag A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Rf3V0rH7R+qbZwHMlwiFtQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: NJsGkk5xTOCxx0mUwLX5jw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,204,1701154800"; d="scan'208";a="245708547" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa5.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 19 Jan 2024 01:21:25 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) by chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 01:21:05 -0700 Received: from localhost (10.10.85.11) by chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.2507.35 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 01:21:04 -0700 Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:21:03 +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: <20240119082103.edy647tbf2akokjy@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> <20240118152353.syk3v7kgf3mutqpp@DEN-DL-M31836.microchip.com> <139fe4c1-6a3e-4ef3-a178-ebbe09652966@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: <139fe4c1-6a3e-4ef3-a178-ebbe09652966@lunn.ch> The 01/18/2024 18:00, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > 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 :) > > Please submit to net-next. I think the ML bot which picks out patches > to backport is likely to see the work Fix in the subject and decided > to backport it anyway. But its not our problem if the bot breaks the > stable rules. Yes, I will do that. > > Is there any danger of regressions? Could the higher word actually > have a value for some reason today, which is being ignored. Would this > change then jump the time forward? I am not seeing any danger of regressions. By default the higher word has a value of 0, and doesn't have any special functionality to jump forward or backwards. It just contains upper 16 bits of the second [47:32]. I have seen only on register PTP_LTC_STEP_ADJ_HI that the most significant bit can signify if to jump forward or backwards. > > Andrew -- /Horatiu