gve has supported software timestamp generation since its inception,
but has not advertised that support via ethtool. This patch correctly
advertises that support.

Signed-off-by: John Fraker <jfraker@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Harshitha Ramamurthy <hramamurthy@google.com>
---
v2: Used ethtool_op_get_ts_info instead of our own implementation, as
    suggested by Jakub
    
 drivers/net/ethernet/google/gve/gve_ethtool.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/google/gve/gve_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/google/gve/gve_ethtool.c
index 815dead..299206d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/google/gve/gve_ethtool.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/google/gve/gve_ethtool.c
@@ -784,5 +784,6 @@ const struct ethtool_ops gve_ethtool_ops = {
 	.set_tunable = gve_set_tunable,
 	.get_priv_flags = gve_get_priv_flags,
 	.set_priv_flags = gve_set_priv_flags,
-	.get_link_ksettings = gve_get_link_ksettings
+	.get_link_ksettings = gve_get_link_ksettings,
+	.get_ts_info = ethtool_op_get_ts_info,
 };
-- 
2.44.0.683.g7961c838ac-goog

John Fraker wrote:
> gve has supported software timestamp generation since its inception,
> but has not advertised that support via ethtool. This patch correctly
> advertises that support.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Fraker <jfraker@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Harshitha Ramamurthy <hramamurthy@google.com>

Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>

> ---
> v2: Used ethtool_op_get_ts_info instead of our own implementation, as
>     suggested by Jakub

FYI: the subject says "net-next 12", not "net-next v2"

On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 8:31 AM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> John Fraker wrote:
> > gve has supported software timestamp generation since its inception,
> > but has not advertised that support via ethtool. This patch correctly
> > advertises that support.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Fraker <jfraker@google.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Harshitha Ramamurthy <hramamurthy@google.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>

Thank you

> > ---
> > v2: Used ethtool_op_get_ts_info instead of our own implementation, as
> >     suggested by Jakub
>
> FYI: the subject says "net-next 12", not "net-next v2"
>
Sorry about that!

I made two rookie mistakes haha. Sending the patch late at night, and
not re-doing my test email after editing.