[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200106060851.GE22387@unicorn.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2020 07:08:51 +0100
From: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Maya Erez <merez@...eaurora.org>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, wil6210@....qualcomm.com,
Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] epic100: allow nesting of ethtool_ops
begin() and complete()
On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 11:08:32PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > @@ -1435,8 +1436,10 @@ static int ethtool_begin(struct net_device *dev)
> > struct epic_private *ep = netdev_priv(dev);
> > void __iomem *ioaddr = ep->ioaddr;
> >
> > + if (ep->ethtool_ops_nesting == U32_MAX)
> > + return -EBUSY;
> > /* power-up, if interface is down */
> > - if (!netif_running(dev)) {
> > + if (ep->ethtool_ops_nesting++ && !netif_running(dev)) {
> > ew32(GENCTL, 0x0200);
> > ew32(NVCTL, (er32(NVCTL) & ~0x003c) | 0x4800);
> > }
>
> Hi Michal
>
> In the via-velocity you added:
>
> + if (vptr->ethtool_ops_nesting == U32_MAX)
> + return -EBUSY;
> + if (!vptr->ethtool_ops_nesting++ && !netif_running(dev))
> velocity_set_power_state(vptr, PCI_D0);
> return 0;
>
> These two fragments differ by a ! . Is that correct?
You are right, thank you for catching it. This should be
if (!ep->ethtool_ops_nesting++ && !netif_running(dev)) {
as well, we only want to wake the device up in the first (outermost)
->begin(). (It would probably do no harm to do it each time but not
doing it in the first would be wrong.)
I'll send v2 in a moment.
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists