[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m3iqgovrsv.fsf@intrepid.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 20:46:24 +0200
From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, romieu@...zoreil.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] WAN: bit and/or confusion
Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com> writes:
> +++ b/drivers/net/wan/dscc4.c
> @@ -663,9 +663,9 @@ static inline void dscc4_rx_skb(struct dscc4_dev_priv *dpriv,
> } else {
> if (skb->data[pkt_len] & FrameRdo)
> dev->stats.rx_fifo_errors++;
> - else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] | ~FrameCrc))
> + else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] & FrameCrc))
> dev->stats.rx_crc_errors++;
This looks like a correct fix.
> - else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] | ~(FrameVfr | FrameRab)))
> + else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] & (FrameVfr | FrameRab)))
> dev->stats.rx_length_errors++;
This test requires both FrameVfr and FrameRab to be true (zero). Perhaps
it should be:
> + else if ((skb->data[pkt_len] & (FrameVfr | FrameRab)) != FrameVfr | FrameRab)
> else
> dev->stats.rx_errors++;
rx_errors is incremented only on remaining errors. I think most drivers
increment rx_errors on all RX errors, and simultaneously rx_*_errors
when needed.
Perhaps something like the following should be better?
u8 status = ~skb->data[pkt_len];
if (status == 0)
looks_good...;
else {
if (status & FrameRab)
...
if (status & FrameVfr)
...
etc.
rx_errors++;
}
I don't have the hardware and can't test (donations of such hw welcome).
--
Krzysztof Halasa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists