From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: biao huang <biao.huang@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [v3, PATCH] net: stmmac: add support for hash table size
 128/256 in dwmac4
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 09:52:49 +0800
Message-ID: <1559008369.24897.66.camel@mhfsdcap03>
References: <1558926867-16472-1-git-send-email-biao.huang@mediatek.com>
         <1558926867-16472-2-git-send-email-biao.huang@mediatek.com>
         <20190527.100800.1719164073038257292.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190527.100800.1719164073038257292.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: joabreu@synopsys.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, yt.shen@mediatek.com, jianguo.zhang@mediatek.com, boon.leong.ong@intel.com
List-Id: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org

Dear David,

On Mon, 2019-05-27 at 10:08 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Biao Huang <biao.huang@mediatek.com>
> Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 11:14:27 +0800
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c
> > index 5e98da4..029a3db 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c
> > @@ -403,41 +403,50 @@ static void dwmac4_set_filter(struct mac_device_info *hw,
> >  			      struct net_device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	void __iomem *ioaddr = (void __iomem *)dev->base_addr;
> > -	unsigned int value = 0;
> > +	unsigned int value;
> > +	int numhashregs = (hw->multicast_filter_bins >> 5);
> > +	int mcbitslog2 = hw->mcast_bits_log2;
> > +	int i;
> 
> Please retain the reverse christmas tree ordering here.
I'm a little confused about the reverse xmas tree ordering.

should I reorder them only according to the total length like this:

	void __iomem *ioaddr = (void __iomem *)dev->base_addr;
	int numhashregs = (hw->multicast_filter_bins >> 5);
	int mcbitslog2 = hw->mcast_bits_log2;
	unsigned int value;
	int i;

or should I gather the same type together, and order types as reverse
xmas tree, then order the same type definitions as reverse xmas tree,
like this:

	void __iomem *ioaddr = (void __iomem *)dev->base_addr;
	unsigned int value;
	int numhashregs = (hw->multicast_filter_bins >> 5);
	int mcbitslog2 = hw->mcast_bits_log2;
	int i;

Thank you.
> 
> Thank you.