>From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> >Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2023 10:15 PM > >On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 17:17:51 +0000 Kubalewski, Arkadiusz wrote: >> >I think better to add the check to pin-register so future synce pin >> >users don't have similar weird ideas. Could you please add this check? >> >> Don't think it is way to go, and I don't think there is anything good >> with preventing device drivers from labeling their pins the way they >>want. > >We had a long argument about how label should have a clearly defined >meaning. We're not going to rehash it on every revision. What did I miss :| Well, as I understand we are discussing if dpll subsystem shall prevent labeling the SyncE type pins. I have labeled them in ice explicitly with the name of a pci device they belong to. You haven't miss much, mostly the problem is described in this thread. Thank you! Arkadiusz
On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 09:19:53 +0000 Kubalewski, Arkadiusz wrote: > >> Don't think it is way to go, and I don't think there is anything good > >> with preventing device drivers from labeling their pins the way they > >> want. > > > >We had a long argument about how label should have a clearly defined > >meaning. We're not going to rehash it on every revision. What did I miss :| > > Well, as I understand we are discussing if dpll subsystem shall prevent > labeling the SyncE type pins. I have labeled them in ice explicitly with > the name of a pci device they belong to. > > You haven't miss much, mostly the problem is described in this thread. Please read this thread: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230503191643.12a6e559@kernel.org/
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.