From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ferruh Yigit Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/29] net/ixgbe/base: add EEE support for DNL-controlled PHYs Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 19:40:56 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1480833100-48545-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> <1480833100-48545-24-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Wei Dai , helin.zhang@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C136377C for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 20:41:07 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <1480833100-48545-24-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 12/4/2016 6:31 AM, Wei Dai wrote: > This patch adds EEE support for DNL-controlled PHYs. Because DNL What is DNL? > does not indicate EEE capability or status, this patch simply > assumes that it is supported. As soon as there is a DNL-supported > PHY that does not support EEE, there will be defects in this area > because the driver will not report the EEE status correctly. > This also deletes some now-unused definitions from an earlier > Marvell PHY implementation and combines a device ID check into a > switch statement. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Dai > --- > drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h | 8 -------- > drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c | 15 +++++++-------- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h > index 9ec17a9..f1761a3 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h > @@ -3720,14 +3720,6 @@ enum ixgbe_fc_mode { > ixgbe_fc_default > }; > > -/* Master/slave control */ > -enum ixgbe_ms_type { > - ixgbe_ms_hw_default = 0, > - ixgbe_ms_force_master, > - ixgbe_ms_force_slave, > - ixgbe_ms_auto > -}; > - This seems not related to this patchset, also patch 15/29 has [1] again seems unrelated to that patch, does it make sense to make these a separate patch? [1] " @@ -4046,8 +4112,8 @@ struct ixgbe_phy_info { bool reset_disable; ixgbe_autoneg_advertised autoneg_advertised; ixgbe_link_speed speeds_supported; - enum ixgbe_ms_type ms_type; - enum ixgbe_ms_type original_ms_type;