On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 10:27:32 -0800 Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > +/** > > + * struct kernel_ethtool_ts_info - kernel copy of struct ethtool_ts_info > > + * @cmd: command number = %ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO > > + * @so_timestamping: bit mask of the sum of the supported SO_TIMESTAMPING > > flags > > + * @phc_index: device index of the associated PHC, or -1 if there is none > > + * @tx_types: bit mask of the supported hwtstamp_tx_types enumeration > > values > > + * @rx_filters: bit mask of the supported hwtstamp_rx_filters enumeration > > values > > + */ > > +struct kernel_ethtool_ts_info { > > + u32 cmd; > > + u32 so_timestamping; > > + int phc_index; > > + enum hwtstamp_tx_types tx_types; > > I might just be terrible at reading code, but isn't this what > tx_reserved in ethtool_ts_info is for? I feel like using one of the > reserved memspaces for this enum removes the need to make > kernel_ethtool_ts_info? I might be missing something obvious however. I did it to prepare the introduction phc_qualifier in patch 12. I am not sure it would be wise to put it under tx/rx_reserved field. IMHO create a new kernel structure is cleaner for that than the hack of using one of the tx/rx_reserved field. Regards, -- Köry Maincent, Bootlin Embedded Linux and kernel engineering https://bootlin.com