On 8/17/21 2:24 PM, Biju Das wrote:
[...]
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 12:27 PM Biju Das
>>>>> <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> 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>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your patch!
>>>>>
>>>>>> --- 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;
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not "unsigned int"? ...
>>>>> This comment applies to a few more subsequent patches.
>>>>
>>>> To avoid signed and unsigned comparison warnings.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> struct ravb_private {
>>>>>> struct net_device *ndev;
>>>>>> struct platform_device *pdev; @@ -1040,6 +1045,8 @@
>>>>>> struct ravb_private {
>>>>>> unsigned txcidm:1; /* TX Clock Internal Delay
>>> Mode
>>>>> */
>>>>>> unsigned rgmii_override:1; /* Deprecated rgmii-*id
>>> behavior
>>>>> */
>>>>>> int num_tx_desc; /* TX descriptors per
>> packet
>>> */
>>>>>
>>>>> ... oh, here's the original culprit.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly, this the reason.
>>>>
>>>> Do you want me to change this into unsigned int? Please let me know.
>>>
>>> Up to you (or the maintainer? ;-)
>>>
>>> For new fields (in the other patches), I would use unsigned for all
>>> unsigned values. Signed values have more pitfalls related to
>>> undefined behavior.
>>
>> Sergei, What is your thoughts here? Please let me know.
>
> Here is my plan.
>
> I will split this patch into two as Andrew suggested and
If you mran changing the ravb_private::num_tx_desc to *unsigned*, it'll be
a good cleanup. What's would be the 2nd part tho?
> Then on the second patch will add as info->unaligned_tx as Sergei suggested.
OK.
> Now the only open point is related to the data type of "int num_tx_desc"
> and to align with sh_eth driver I will keep int.
The sh_eth driver simply doesn't have this -- it always use 1 descriptor.
> Regards,
> Biju
MBR, Sergey
