Hello Dan, Am 28.02.19 um 18:57 schrieb Dan Murphy: > Wolfgang > > On 2/28/19 11:33 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Am 14.02.19 um 19:27 schrieb Dan Murphy: >>> Migrate the m_can code to use the m_can_platform framework >>> code. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@xxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> v5 - Updated copyright, change m_can_classdev to m_can_priv, removed extra >>> KCONFIG flag - https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1033095/ >>> >>> drivers/net/can/m_can/Kconfig | 8 +- >>> drivers/net/can/m_can/Makefile | 1 + >>> drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c | 745 ++++++++++++++++----------------- >>> 3 files changed, 367 insertions(+), 387 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/m_can/Kconfig b/drivers/net/can/m_can/Kconfig >>> index 04f20dd39007..66e31022a5fa 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/Kconfig >>> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/Kconfig >>> @@ -1,5 +1,11 @@ >>> config CAN_M_CAN >>> + tristate "Bosch M_CAN support" >>> + ---help--- >>> + Say Y here if you want to support for Bosch M_CAN controller. >> >> Typo? >> > > Maybe like you pointed out to update the help. I was just not sure if it's correct English... but you know better! > >>> + >>> +config CAN_M_CAN_PLATFORM >>> + tristate "Bosch M_CAN support for io-mapped devices" >>> depends on HAS_IOMEM >>> - tristate "Bosch M_CAN devices" >>> + depends on CAN_M_CAN >>> ---help--- >>> Say Y here if you want to support for Bosch M_CAN controller. >> >> Please update the help. > > Ack >> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/m_can/Makefile b/drivers/net/can/m_can/Makefile >>> index 8bbd7f24f5be..057bbcdb3c74 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/Makefile >>> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/Makefile >>> @@ -3,3 +3,4 @@ >>> # >>> >>> obj-$(CONFIG_CAN_M_CAN) += m_can.o >>> +obj-$(CONFIG_CAN_M_CAN_PLATFORM) += m_can_platform.o >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c b/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c >>> index 9b449400376b..2ceccb870557 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c ... snip ... >>> @@ -924,6 +885,9 @@ static irqreturn_t m_can_isr(int irq, void *dev_id) >>> } >>> } >>> >>> + if (priv->ops->clr_dev_interrupts) >>> + priv->ops->clr_dev_interrupts(priv); >> >> post_irq _handler? >> > > I can clear them on entry as well OK! ...snip... >>> - niso_timeout = readl_poll_timeout((priv->base + M_CAN_CCCR), cccr_poll, >>> - (cccr_poll == cccr_reg), 0, 10); >>> + for (i = 0; i <= 10; i++) { >>> + cccr_poll = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_CCCR); >>> + if (cccr_poll == cccr_reg) >>> + niso_timeout = 0; >>> + } >> >> There is no break and delay in the loop? What was the reason why you >> can't use readl_poll_timeout()? >> > > OK a break if NISO is supported then and probably could add a 1us delay original code on > line 1232 had no delay but timeout at 10us. > > readl_poll_timeout is for iomapped devices. How would this work for peripherial devices? Well, it takes much more time to read the register via SPI... maybe using if (priv->is_peripherial) ... to handle the different timings would make sense here. >>> >>> /* Clear NISO */ >>> cccr_reg &= ~(CCCR_NISO); >>> @@ -1242,107 +1210,95 @@ static bool m_can_niso_supported(const struct m_can_priv *priv) >>> return !niso_timeout; >>> } ... snip... >>> -static netdev_tx_t m_can_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, >>> - struct net_device *dev) >>> +static void m_can_tx_handler(struct m_can_priv *priv) >>> { >>> - struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev); >>> - struct canfd_frame *cf = (struct canfd_frame *)skb->data; >>> + struct canfd_frame *cf = (struct canfd_frame *)priv->skb->data; >>> + struct net_device *dev = priv->net; >>> + struct sk_buff *skb = priv->skb; >> >> Maybe "tx_skb" is a clearer member name.. > > Again this was named skb to minimize deltas from original code. I mean "priv->tx_skb"! > skb was passed into the start_xmit function and used throughout the function. > > Since there was little delta in this function I opt'd to keep the names as is. > Wolfgang.
