Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/6] net: ethernet: implement OA TC6 configuration function

[<Parthiban.Veerasooran@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Andrew,

On 14/09/23 6:16 am, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
>> +int oa_tc6_configure(struct oa_tc6 *tc6, u8 cps, bool ctrl_prot, bool tx_cut_thr,
>> +                  bool rx_cut_thr)
>> +{
>> +     u32 regval;
>> +     int ret;
>> +
>> +     /* Read and configure the IMASK0 register for unmasking the interrupts */
>> +     ret = oa_tc6_read_register(tc6, OA_TC6_IMASK0, &regval, 1);
>> +     if (ret)
>> +             return ret;
>> +
>> +     regval &= TXPEM & TXBOEM & TXBUEM & RXBOEM & LOFEM & HDREM;
>> +     ret = oa_tc6_write_register(tc6, OA_TC6_IMASK0, &regval, 1);
> 
> It is not so obvious what this 1 means. Maybe change to regval[1], and
> user ARRAY_SIZE(). What also does not help is the function name,
> oa_tc6_write_register(). Singular. So it appears to write one register,
> not multiple registers. It might even make sense to make
> oa_tc6_write_register() truly access a single register, and add
> oa_tc6_write_registers() for multiple registers.
Ok, I will implement two functions to serve their purposes.
> 
>> +/* Unmasking interrupt fields in IMASK0 */
>> +#define HDREM                ~BIT(5)         /* Header Error Mask */
>> +#define LOFEM                ~BIT(4)         /* Loss of Framing Error Mask */
>> +#define RXBOEM               ~BIT(3)         /* Rx Buffer Overflow Error Mask */
>> +#define TXBUEM               ~BIT(2)         /* Tx Buffer Underflow Error Mask */
>> +#define TXBOEM               ~BIT(1)         /* Tx Buffer Overflow Error Mask */
>> +#define TXPEM                ~BIT(0)         /* Tx Protocol Error Mask */
> 
> Using ~BIT(X) is very usual. I would not do this, Principle of Least
> Surprise.
Sorry, I don't get your point. Could you please explain bit more?
> 
>>   struct oa_tc6 {
>> -     struct spi_device *spi;
>> -     bool ctrl_prot;
>> +     struct completion rst_complete;
>>        struct task_struct *tc6_task;
>>        wait_queue_head_t tc6_wq;
>> +     struct spi_device *spi;
>> +     bool tx_cut_thr;
>> +     bool rx_cut_thr;
>> +     bool ctrl_prot;
>>        bool int_flag;
>> -     struct completion rst_complete;
>> +     u8 cps;
>>   };
> 
> Please try not to move stuff around. It makes the diff bigger than it
> should be.
Ah ok, will take care in the next version.

Best Regards,
Parthiban V

> 
>         Andrew
>