Re: [net-next, PATCH] net: stmmac: use correct define to get rx timestamp on GMAC4

Alexandre Torgue
2019-02-14T15:01:11Z

Hi Jose

On 2/14/19 3:18 PM, Jose Abreu wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> On 2/14/2019 2:12 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>> In dwmac4_wrback_get_rx_timestamp_status we looking for a RX timestamp.
>> For that receive descriptors are handled and so we should use defines
>> related to receive descriptors. It'll no change the functional behavior
>> as RDES3_RDES1_VALID=TDES3_RS1V=BIT(26) but it makes code easier to read.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_descs.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_descs.c
>> index 20299f6..9f062b3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_descs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_descs.c
>> @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int dwmac4_wrback_get_rx_timestamp_status(void *desc, void *next_desc,
>> int ret = -EINVAL;
>>
>> /* Get the status from normal w/b descriptor */
>> - if (likely(p->des3 & TDES3_RS1V)) {
>> + if (likely(p->des3 & RDES3_RDES1_VALID)) {
>
> Shouldn't this also use le32_to_cpu() like bellow ?

I agree. I focused on cosmetic but yes you are right, we have to take
car about endianness as this IP is used by different processors (using
different endianness). I gonna send a v2.
I think dwmac4_rx_check_timestamp have the same kind of issue. Another
patch should be sent for it. no ?

regards
Alex

>
> Thanks,
> Jose Miguel Abreu
>
>> if (likely(le32_to_cpu(p->des1) & RDES1_TIMESTAMP_AVAILABLE)) {
>> int i = 0;