[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a4c96650-7836-26db-7e12-44ae56dca15a@omp.ru>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 21:54:26 +0300
From: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
To: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@...russia.ru>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Yuusuke Ashizuka <ashiduka@...itsu.com>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>,
Biju Das <biju.das@...renesas.com>,
"Prabhakar Mahadev Lad" <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] ravb: Add tsrq to struct ravb_hw_info
On 10/4/21 9:47 PM, Biju Das wrote:
[...]
>>> The TCCR bits are called transmit start request (queue 0/1), not
>> transmit start request queue 0/1.
>>> I think you've read too much value into them for what is just TX queue
>> 0/1.
>>>
>>>> Add a tsrq variable to struct ravb_hw_info to handle this difference.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> RFC->v1:
>>>> * Added tsrq variable instead of multi_tsrq feature bit.
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h | 1 +
>>>> drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>>> index 9cd3a15743b4..c586070193ef 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>>> @@ -997,6 +997,7 @@ struct ravb_hw_info {
>>>> netdev_features_t net_features;
>>>> int stats_len;
>>>> size_t max_rx_len;
>>>> + u32 tsrq;
>>>
>>> I'd call it 'tccr_value' instead.
>>
>> Or even better, 'tccr_mask'...
>
> We are not masking anything here right.
We do -- we pass the TCCR mask to ravb_wait().
[...]
> Regards,
> Biju
MBR, Sergey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists