[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87wpa47eqr.fsf@weeman.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 11:07:08 -0400
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 08/18] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: move generic VTU GetNext
Hi Andrew,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> writes:
>> + /* Write the VID to iterate from only once */
>> + if (!entry->valid) {
>> + err = mv88e6xxx_g1_vtu_vid_write(chip, entry);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>> + }
>
> Please could you add a bigger comment. It is not clear why you write
> it, when it is invalid. That just seems wrong, and needs a good
> comment to explain why it is correct, more than what you currently
> have as a comment.
This trick could indeed benefit a better explanation. The reason for it
is that I used the same comment as the ATU GetNext implementation, i.e.:
/* Write the MAC address to iterate from only once */
if (entry->state == GLOBAL_ATU_DATA_STATE_UNUSED) {
err = mv88e6xxx_g1_atu_mac_write(chip, entry);
if (err)
return err;
}
I suggest me sending a future patch to improve the comments of both
GetNext (ATU and VTU) implementations at the same time later.
Thanks,
Vivien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists