---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_tsn.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_tsn.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_tsn.c
index 02dd41aff634..61f047ebf34d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_tsn.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_tsn.c
@@ -49,6 +49,13 @@ static unsigned int igc_tsn_new_flags(struct igc_adapter *adapter)
return new_flags;
}
+static bool igc_tsn_is_tx_mode_in_tsn(struct igc_adapter *adapter)
+{
+ struct igc_hw *hw = &adapter->hw;
+
+ return (bool)(rd32(IGC_TQAVCTRL) & IGC_TQAVCTRL_TRANSMIT_MODE_TSN);
Perhaps it is more a question of taste than anything else.
But my preference, FIIW, is to avoid casts.
And I think in this case using !! is a common pattern.
(Completely untested!)
return !!(rd32(IGC_TQAVCTRL) & IGC_TQAVCTRL_TRANSMIT_MODE_TSN);
Sure, will update.
+
+ if ((any_tsn_enabled && !igc_tsn_is_tx_mode_in_tsn(adapter)) ||
+ (!any_tsn_enabled && igc_tsn_is_tx_mode_in_tsn(adapter)))
+ return true;
+ else
+ return false;
Likewise, this is probably more a matter of taste than anything else.
But I think this could be expressed as:
(Completely untested!)
return (any_tsn_enabled && !igc_tsn_is_tx_mode_in_tsn(adapter)) ||
(!any_tsn_enabled && igc_tsn_is_tx_mode_in_tsn(adapter));
Similarly in the previous patch of this series.
Will update, your suggestion is better, lesser parenthesis.
Thanks.
