linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 net-next] r8169:add support for RTL8168EP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 6 Oct 2014 08:56:39 +0000
From:	Hau <hau@...ltek.com>
To:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	nic_swsd <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 net-next] r8169:add support for RTL8168EP


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francois Romieu [mailto:romieu@...zoreil.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2014 4:33 AM
> To: Hau
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; nic_swsd; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] r8169:add support for RTL8168EP
> 
> Chun-Hao Lin <hau@...ltek.com> :
> [...]
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> > index 54476ba..3efdf4d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> [...]
> > @@ -1276,6 +1273,52 @@ static void rtl_w0w1_eri(struct rtl8169_private
> *tp, int addr, u32 mask, u32 p,
> >  	rtl_eri_write(tp, addr, mask, (val & ~m) | p, type);  }
> >
> > +static u32 ocp_read(struct rtl8169_private *tp, u8 mask, u16 reg) {
> > +	void __iomem *ioaddr = tp->mmio_addr;
> > +
> > +	switch (tp->mac_version) {
> > +	case RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_27:
> > +	case RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_28:
> > +	case RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_31:
> > +		RTL_W32(OCPAR, ((u32)mask & 0x0f) << 12 | (reg & 0x0fff));
> > +		return rtl_udelay_loop_wait_high(tp, &rtl_ocpar_cond, 100,
> 20)
> > +			? RTL_R32(OCPDR) : ~0;
> 
> '?' should be on the previous line. There isn't more room than needed but it's
> still ok.
> 
> [...]
> > +static void rtl8168ep_2_hw_phy_config(struct rtl8169_private *tp) {
> [...]
> > +	rtl_w0w1_phy(tp, 0x14, 0x7C00, ~0x7Cff);
> 
> Nit:	rtl_w0w1_phy(tp, 0x14, 0x7c00, ~0x7cff);
> 
> [...]
> +	rtl_writephy(tp, 0x1f, 0x0bC8);
> 
> Nit:	rtl_writephy(tp, 0x1f, 0x0bc8);
> 
> Tangent: please find feature wise identical code below without moves.
> I have avoided introducing more helpers that may have kept the code more
> balanced for 8168dp vs 8168ep as it wasn't the point and it is still possible to
> change the code from there.
> 
> It provides a different review experience. Feel free to give it a thought.

Do you mean I should collect similar hardware parameters setting into one function?
or
I should set hardware parameters according to hardware feature support version?
For example,
If mac_version == RTL8168DP
	dash_ver = 1
else If mac_version == RTL8168DP
	dash_ver = 2

if dashver == 1
	...
else if dashver == 2
	...

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/