[PATCH net-next v4 0/9] Create common DPLL configuration API

[Jiri Pirko]

Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 01:36:11PM CEST, vadim.fedorenko at linux.dev wrote:
>On 15/08/2023 03:45, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 21:03:31 +0100 Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
>> >   create mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/dpll.rst
>> >   create mode 100644 Documentation/netlink/specs/dpll.yaml
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/Kconfig
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/Makefile
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/dpll_core.h
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/dpll_netlink.c
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/dpll_netlink.h
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/dpll_nl.c
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/dpll/dpll_nl.h
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_dpll.c
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_dpll.h
>> >   create mode 100644 drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/dpll.c
>> >   create mode 100644 include/linux/dpll.h
>> >   create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/dpll.h
>> 
>> Feels like we're lacking tests here. Is there a common subset of
>> stuff we can expect reasonable devices to support?
>> Anything you used in development that can be turned into tests?
>
>Well, we were playing with the tool ynl/cli.py and it's stated in
>the cover letter. But needs proper hardware to run. I'm not sure
>we can easily create emulation device to run tests.

Well, something like "dpllsim", similar to netdevsim would be certainly
possible, then you can use it to write selftests for the uapi testing.
But why don't we do that as a follow-up patchset?