[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <777c30b1-e94e-e241-b10c-ecd4d557bc06@omp.ru>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 23:38:30 +0300
From: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
To: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com>,
"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>,
Biju Das <biju.das@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 04/13] ravb: Add ptp_cfg_active to struct
ravb_hw_info
On 8/25/21 10:01 AM, Biju Das wrote:
> There are some H/W differences for the gPTP feature between
> R-Car Gen3, R-Car Gen2, and RZ/G2L as below.
>
> 1) On R-Car Gen3, gPTP support is active in config mode.
> 2) On R-Car Gen2, gPTP support is not active in config mode.
> 3) RZ/G2L does not support the gPTP feature.
>
> Add a ptp_cfg_active hw feature bit to struct ravb_hw_info for
> supporting gPTP active in config mode for R-Car Gen3.
Wait, we've just done this ion the previous patch!
> This patch also removes enum ravb_chip_id, chip_id from both
> struct ravb_hw_info and struct ravb_private, as it is unused.
>
> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
> Reviewed-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h | 8 +-------
> drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 12 +++++-------
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> index 9ecf1a8c3ca8..209e030935aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> @@ -979,17 +979,11 @@ struct ravb_ptp {
> struct ravb_ptp_perout perout[N_PER_OUT];
> };
>
> -enum ravb_chip_id {
> - RCAR_GEN2,
> - RCAR_GEN3,
> -};
> -
> struct ravb_hw_info {
> const char (*gstrings_stats)[ETH_GSTRING_LEN];
> size_t gstrings_size;
> netdev_features_t net_hw_features;
> netdev_features_t net_features;
> - enum ravb_chip_id chip_id;
> int stats_len;
> size_t max_rx_len;
I would put the above in a spearte patch...
> unsigned aligned_tx: 1;
> @@ -999,6 +993,7 @@ struct ravb_hw_info {
> unsigned tx_counters:1; /* E-MAC has TX counters */
> unsigned multi_irqs:1; /* AVB-DMAC and E-MAC has multiple irqs */
> unsigned no_ptp_cfg_active:1; /* AVB-DMAC does not support gPTP active in config mode */
> + unsigned ptp_cfg_active:1; /* AVB-DMAC has gPTP support active in config mode */
Huh?
> };
>
> struct ravb_private {
[...]
> @@ -2216,7 +2213,7 @@ static int ravb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->ts_skb_list);
>
> /* Initialise PTP Clock driver */
> - if (info->chip_id != RCAR_GEN2)
> + if (info->ptp_cfg_active)
> ravb_ptp_init(ndev, pdev);
What's that? Didn't you touch this lie in patch #3?
This seems lie a NAK bait... :-(
MBR, Sergey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists