Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] m68k: io_mm.h - add APNE 100 MBit support

Michael Schmitz
2021-06-07T08:20:53Z

Hi Geert,

Thanks for reviewing this one as well!

Am 07.06.2021 um 20:01 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 7:54 AM Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Add code to support 10 Mbit and 100 Mbit mode for APNE driver.
>>
>> A new ISA type ISA_TYPE_AG100 switches the Amiga ISA inb accessor
>> to word access as required by the 100 Mbit cards.
>
> missing "dynamically".

OK...

>
>>
>> Patch modified after patch "[PATCH RFC net-next] Amiga PCMCIA
>> 100 MBit card support" submitted to netdev 2018/09/16 by Alex
>> Kazik <alex@kazik.de>.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
>
> Thanks for your patch!
>
>> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/io_mm.h
>> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/io_mm.h
>> @@ -101,6 +101,11 @@
>> #define ISA_TYPE_Q40 (1)
>> #define ISA_TYPE_AG (2)
>> #define ISA_TYPE_ENEC (3)
>> +#define ISA_TYPE_AG100 (4) /* for 100 MBit APNE card */
>
> As this type may be needed for other cards, perhaps it should be
> named after what it really does, i.e. always using 16-bit accesses?
> ISA_TYPE_AG16?

Yep, that sounds better.

>
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_APNE100MBIT)
>
> #ifdef
>
>> +#define MULTI_ISA 1
>> +#endif
>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_Q40) && !defined(MULTI_ISA)
>> #define ISA_TYPE ISA_TYPE_Q40
>> @@ -135,6 +140,9 @@ static inline u8 __iomem *isa_itb(unsigned long addr)
>> #ifdef CONFIG_Q40
>> case ISA_TYPE_Q40: return (u8 __iomem *)Q40_ISA_IO_B(addr);
>> #endif
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_APNE100MBIT)
>
> #ifdef
>
>> + case ISA_TYPE_AG100: fallthrough;
>
> Fallthrough to what? Oh, to ISA_TYPE_AG.
> Please make this clear, and safer, by moving this inside the #ifdef
> below (CONFIG_APNE100MBIT depends on CONFIG_AMIGA_PCMCIA).

OK, good point.

>> +#endif
>> #ifdef CONFIG_AMIGA_PCMCIA
>> case ISA_TYPE_AG: return (u8 __iomem *)AG_ISA_IO_B(addr);
>> #endif
>
>> @@ -212,13 +232,16 @@ static inline u16 __iomem *isa_mtw(unsigned long addr)
>> }
>>
>>
>> -#define isa_inb(port) in_8(isa_itb(port))
>
> Why move it below? Because its comment does not apply to the below?

Because the new form depends on isa_inw()? I've seen order matter in CPP
statements before ...

>> #define isa_inw(port) (ISA_SEX ? in_be16(isa_itw(port)) : in_le16(isa_itw(port)))
>> #define isa_inl(port) (ISA_SEX ? in_be32(isa_itl(port)) : in_le32(isa_itl(port)))
>> #define isa_outb(val,port) out_8(isa_itb(port),(val))
>> #define isa_outw(val,port) (ISA_SEX ? out_be16(isa_itw(port),(val)) : out_le16(isa_itw(port),(val)))
>> #define isa_outl(val,port) (ISA_SEX ? out_be32(isa_itl(port),(val)) : out_le32(isa_itl(port),(val)))
>>
>> +/* for APNE 100 Mbit cards - hope the APNE 100 case will be eliminated as
>> + * dead code if MULTI_ISA is not set */
>
> I don't think this comment is needed.

I'll remove it, then.

Cheers,

Michael

>
>> +#define isa_inb(port) ((ISA_TYPE == ISA_TYPE_AG100) ? ((port) & 1 ? isa_inw((port) - 1) & 0xff : isa_inw(port) >> 8) : in_8(isa_itb(port))
>> +
>> #define isa_readb(p) in_8(isa_mtb((unsigned long)(p)))
>> #define isa_readw(p) \
>> (ISA_SEX ? in_be16(isa_mtw((unsigned long)(p))) \
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>