[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 net-next 6/6] docs: net: Add description of SyncE interfaces
Jakub Kicinski
kuba at kernel.org
Mon Nov 8 17:03:02 UTC 2021
On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 18:29:50 +0200 Ido Schimmel wrote:
> I also want to re-iterate my dissatisfaction with the interface being
> netdev-centric. By modelling the EEC as a standalone object we will be
> able to extend it to set the source of the EEC to something other than a
> netdev in the future. If we don't do it now, we will end up with two
> ways to report the source of the EEC (i.e., EEC_SRC_PORT and something
> else).
>
> Other advantages of modelling the EEC as a separate object include the
> ability for user space to determine the mapping between netdevs and EECs
> (currently impossible) and reporting additional EEC attributes such as
> SyncE clockIdentity and default SSM code. There is really no reason to
> report all of this identical information via multiple netdevs.
Indeed, I feel convinced. I believe the OCP timing card will benefit
from such API as well. I pinged Jonathan if he doesn't have cycles
I'll do the typing.
What do you have in mind for driver abstracting away pin selection?
For a standalone clock fed PPS signal from a backplate this will be
impossible, so we may need some middle way.
More information about the Intel-wired-lan
mailing list