[PATCH v6 4/5] net: ti: icssg-prueth: add packet timestamping and ptp support

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/08/2023 13:32, MD Danish Anwar wrote:
> From: Roger Quadros <rogerq at ti.com>
> 
> Add packet timestamping TS and PTP PHC clock support.
> 
> For AM65x and AM64x:
>  - IEP1 is not used
>  - IEP0 is configured in shadow mode with 1ms cycle and shared between
> Linux and FW. It provides time and TS in number cycles, so special
> conversation in ns is required.
>  - IEP0 shared between PRUeth ports.
>  - IEP0 supports PPS, periodic output.
>  - IEP0 settime() and enabling PPS required FW interraction.
>  - RX TS provided with each packet in CPPI5 descriptor.
>  - TX TS returned through separate ICSSG hw queues for each port. TX TS
> readiness is signaled by INTC IRQ. Only one packet at time can be requested
> for TX TS.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq at ti.com>
> Co-developed-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko at ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko at ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr at ti.com>
> Reviewed-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org>

How patch author could review or not review its own code? How does it
even work? I write a patch and for example judge - oh no, it is wrong,
but I will still send it, just without my review. Or I write a patch -
oh, I like it, I wrote excellent code, let me add review tag for my own
code!

> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms at kernel.org>

Where?


Best regards,
Krzysztof