[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SG2PR06MB1165C7D7B7DFBAC4B5BAB09A8A8F0@SG2PR06MB1165.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 18:53:22 +0000
From: Chris Brandt <Chris.Brandt@...esas.com>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] sh_eth: remove unchecked interrupts
Hi Geert,
On 12/1/2016, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>
> On 12/01/2016 05:42 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c
> >> @@ -518,7 +518,7 @@ static struct sh_eth_cpu_data r7s72100_data = {
> >>
> >> .ecsr_value = ECSR_ICD,
> >> .ecsipr_value = ECSIPR_ICDIP,
> >> - .eesipr_value = 0xff7f009f,
> >> + .eesipr_value = 0xe77f009f,
> >
> > Comment not directly related to the merits of this patch: the EESIPR
> > bit definitions seem to be identical to those for EESR, so we can get
> > rid of the hardcoded values here?
>
> Do you mean using the @define's? We have EESIPR bits also declared,
> see enum DMAC_IM_BIT,
Is your idea to get rid of .eesipr_value for devices that have values
that are the same as .eesr_err_check?
For example in sh_eth_dev_init():
sh_eth_modify(ndev, EESR, 0, 0);
mdp->irq_enabled = true;
- sh_eth_write(ndev, mdp->cd->eesipr_value, EESIPR);
+ if (mdp->cd->eesipr_value)
+ sh_eth_write(ndev, mdp->cd->eesipr_value, EESIPR);
+ else
+ sh_eth_write(ndev, mdp->cd->eesr_err_check, EESIPR);
Chris
Powered by blists - more mailing lists