[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <613026c7-319c-480f-83da-ffc85faaf42b@jacekk.info>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 15:05:01 +0200
From: Jacek Kowalski <jacek@...ekk.info>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vlad URSU <vlad@...u.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] e1000e: ignore factory-default checksum value on
TGP platform
>>>> +#define NVM_CHECKSUM_FACTORY_DEFAULT 0xFFFF
>>>
>>> Perhaps it is too long, but I liked Vlad's suggestion of naming this
>>> NVM_CHECKSUM_WORD_FACTORY_DEFAULT.
So the proposals are:
1. NVM_CHECKSUM_WORD_FACTORY_DEFAULT
2. NVM_CHECKSUM_FACTORY_DEFAULT
3. NVM_CHECKSUM_INVALID
4. NVM_CHECKSUM_MISSING
5. NVM_CHECKSUM_EMPTY
6. NVM_NO_CHECKSUM
Any other contenders?
--
Best regards,
Jacek Kowalski
Powered by blists - more mailing lists