On 28.08.2021 12:20, Biju Das wrote:
[...]
RZ/G2L supports HW checksum on RX and TX whereas R-Car supports on RX.
Factorise ravb_set_features to support this feature.
Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h | 1 +
drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
index 1f9d9f54bf1b..1789309c4c03 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
@@ -1901,8 +1901,8 @@ static void ravb_set_rx_csum(struct net_device
*ndev, bool enable)
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->lock, flags); }
-static int ravb_set_features(struct net_device *ndev,
- netdev_features_t features)
+static int ravb_set_features_rx_csum(struct net_device *ndev,
+ netdev_features_t features)
How about ravb_set_features_rcar() or s/th alike?
What about
ravb_rcar_set_features_csum()?
and
ravb_rgeth_set_features_csum()?
>
If you are ok with this name change I will incorporate this changes in next - RFC patchset?
If you still want ravb_set_features_rcar() and ravb_set_features_rgeth(), I am ok with that as well.
Please let me know, which name you like.
Looking back at sh_eth, my variant seems to fit better...
Regards,
Biju
[...]
MBR, Sergey
