Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/6] net: ethernet: implement OA TC6 configuration function

From: Parthiban.Veerasooran
Date: Tue Sep 19 2023 - 06:58:46 EST


Hi Andrew,

On 14/09/23 6:16 am, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>
>> +int oa_tc6_configure(struct oa_tc6 *tc6, u8 cps, bool ctrl_prot, bool tx_cut_thr,
>> + bool rx_cut_thr)
>> +{
>> + u32 regval;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + /* Read and configure the IMASK0 register for unmasking the interrupts */
>> + ret = oa_tc6_read_register(tc6, OA_TC6_IMASK0, &regval, 1);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + regval &= TXPEM & TXBOEM & TXBUEM & RXBOEM & LOFEM & HDREM;
>> + ret = oa_tc6_write_register(tc6, OA_TC6_IMASK0, &regval, 1);
>
> It is not so obvious what this 1 means. Maybe change to regval[1], and
> user ARRAY_SIZE(). What also does not help is the function name,
> oa_tc6_write_register(). Singular. So it appears to write one register,
> not multiple registers. It might even make sense to make
> oa_tc6_write_register() truly access a single register, and add
> oa_tc6_write_registers() for multiple registers.
Ok, I will implement two functions to serve their purposes.
>
>> +/* Unmasking interrupt fields in IMASK0 */
>> +#define HDREM ~BIT(5) /* Header Error Mask */
>> +#define LOFEM ~BIT(4) /* Loss of Framing Error Mask */
>> +#define RXBOEM ~BIT(3) /* Rx Buffer Overflow Error Mask */
>> +#define TXBUEM ~BIT(2) /* Tx Buffer Underflow Error Mask */
>> +#define TXBOEM ~BIT(1) /* Tx Buffer Overflow Error Mask */
>> +#define TXPEM ~BIT(0) /* Tx Protocol Error Mask */
>
> Using ~BIT(X) is very usual. I would not do this, Principle of Least
> Surprise.
Sorry, I don't get your point. Could you please explain bit more?
>
>> struct oa_tc6 {
>> - struct spi_device *spi;
>> - bool ctrl_prot;
>> + struct completion rst_complete;
>> struct task_struct *tc6_task;
>> wait_queue_head_t tc6_wq;
>> + struct spi_device *spi;
>> + bool tx_cut_thr;
>> + bool rx_cut_thr;
>> + bool ctrl_prot;
>> bool int_flag;
>> - struct completion rst_complete;
>> + u8 cps;
>> };
>
> Please try not to move stuff around. It makes the diff bigger than it
> should be.
Ah ok, will take care in the next version.

Best Regards,
Parthiban V

>
> Andrew
>