Hi Sergei,
> Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v2 1/8] ravb: Add struct ravb_hw_info to
> driver data
>
> Hi Sergei,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/8] ravb: Add struct ravb_hw_info to
> > driver data
> >
> > On 8/2/21 1:26 PM, Biju Das wrote:
> >
> > > The DMAC and EMAC blocks of Gigabit Ethernet IP found on RZ/G2L SoC
> > > are similar to the R-Car Ethernet AVB IP. With a few changes in the
> > > driver we can support both IPs.
> > >
> > > Currently a runtime decision based on the chip type is used to
> > > distinguish the HW differences between the SoC families.
> > >
> > > The number of TX descriptors for R-Car Gen3 is 1 whereas on R-Car
> > > Gen2 and RZ/G2L it is 2. For cases like this it is better to select
> > > the number of TX descriptors by using a structure with a value,
> > > rather than a runtime decision based on the chip type.
> > >
> > > This patch adds the num_tx_desc variable to struct ravb_hw_info and
> > > also replaces the driver data chip type with struct ravb_hw_info by
> > > moving chip type to it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > > * Incorporated Andrew and Sergei's review comments for making it
> > smaller patch
> > > and provided detailed description.
> > > ---
> > > drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h | 7 +++++
> > > drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 38
> > > +++++++++++++++---------
> > > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> > > index 80e62ca2e3d3..cfb972c05b34 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
> > > @@ -988,6 +988,11 @@ enum ravb_chip_id {
> > > RCAR_GEN3,
> > > };
> > >
> > > +struct ravb_hw_info {
> > > + enum ravb_chip_id chip_id;
> > > + int num_tx_desc;
> >
> > I think this is rather the driver's choice, than the h/w feature...
> > Perhaps a rename would help with that? :-)
>
> It is consistent with current naming convention used by the driver.
> NUM_TX_DESC macro is replaced by num_tx_desc.
So the name should be ok.
Indeed we are agreed to add function pointers to struct ravb_hw_info to avoid another level of indirection.
If the concern is related to duplication of data(ie,priv->num_tx_desc vs info->num_tx_desc)
I have a plan to remove priv->num_tx_desc with info->num_tx_desc later.
Regards,
Biju
