Hello Vladimir, On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 01:03:21 +0200 Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx> wrote: > (trimmed CC list of bouncing email addresses) Thanks, I will be more careful on next patch series version. > From previous discussions, I believe that a device tree property was > added in order to prevent perceived performance regressions when > timestamping support is added to a PHY driver, correct? Yes, i.e. to select the default and better timestamp on a board. > I have a dumb question: if updating the device trees is needed in order > to prevent these behavior changes, then how is the regression problem > addressed for those device trees which don't contain this new property > (all device trees)? On that case there is not really solution, but be aware that CONFIG_PHY_TIMESTAMPING need to be activated to allow timestamping on the PHY. Currently in mainline only few (3) defconfig have it enabled so it is really not spread, maybe I could add more documentation to prevent further regression issue when adding support of timestamp to a PHY driver. Regards, Köry
