[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <OS3PR01MB6593B50F4C5BF3687EE3FA97BA84A@OS3PR01MB6593.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 16:29:09 +0000
From: Min Li <min.li.xe@...esas.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Min Li <lnimi@...mail.com>
CC: "richardcochran@...il.com" <richardcochran@...il.com>,
"lee@...nel.org" <lee@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v6 1/6] ptp: clockmatrix: support 32-bit address
space
> >
> > Hi Min Li,
> >
> > My understanding of Paolo's review of v5 was that it would be cleaner to:
> >
> > 1. Leave the type of the module parameter as u16 2. Update the type of
> > the regaddr parameter to u32
>
> [almost over the air conflict here ;) ]
>
> I think the module parameter as u32 is needed, as later macro definitions
> will leverage that.
>
> >
> > And...
> >
> > ... avoid the need for changes like the two above.
>
> This part is correct/what I meant ;)
>
Hi Paolo/Simon
Thanks for your reviews. Ideally, I would want to maintain regaddr as u16 since for clockmatrix addressing, it is only the lower 8bit of the whole 32bit address while module is upper 24bit. On the other hand, for some simple cases, where only one register in a module, their addresses are defined by module only without regaddr such as sync_ctrl0/1
Overall, I still want to differentiate between module and regaddr and don't wanna mix them up.
Min
Powered by blists - more mailing lists