[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CO6PR18MB38739CA874F3748919C8361CB08C9@CO6PR18MB3873.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:49:25 +0000
From: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com" <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
Yan Markman <ymarkman@...vell.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"mw@...ihalf.com" <mw@...ihalf.com>,
"andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
"atenart@...nel.org" <atenart@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com" <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
"gregory.clement@...tlin.com" <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v13 net-next 05/15] net: mvpp2: add PPv23
version definition
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 12:48:52PM +0200, stefanc@...vell.com wrote:
> > From: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> >
> > This patch add PPv23 version definition.
> > PPv23 is new packet processor in CP115.
> > Everything that supported by PPv22, also supported by PPv23.
> > No functional changes in this stage.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> > Acked-by: Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
>
> > @@ -7049,6 +7049,11 @@ static int mvpp2_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> > priv->port_map |= BIT(i);
> > }
> >
> > + if (priv->hw_version != MVPP21) {
> > + if (mvpp2_read(priv, MVPP2_VER_ID_REG) ==
> MVPP2_VER_PP23)
> > + priv->hw_version = MVPP23;
> > + }
> > +
>
> The only minor comment I have on this is... the formatting of the above.
> Wouldn't:
>
> if (priv->hw_version >= MVPP22 &&
> mvpp2_read(priv, MVPP2_VER_ID_REG) == MVPP2_VER_PP23)
> priv->hw_version = MVPP23;
>
> read better?
>
> Do we need to even check priv->hw_version here? Isn't this register
> implemented in PPv2.1 where it contains the value zero?
Yes, we can just:
if (mvpp2_read(priv, MVPP2_VER_ID_REG) == MVPP2_VER_PP23)
priv->hw_version = MVPP23;
Thanks,
Stefan.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists