Re: [RFC Patch net-next v1 1/9] r8169: add some register definitions

Andrew Lunn
2026-04-27T02:30:21Z

> > +#define RXS_8125B_RSS_UDP_V4 BIT(27)
>
> This register naming is unfortunate. What stands 8125B for, and what V4?
> Does V4 stand for a global version of the Realtek RSS IP block?
> Then the 8125B would be redundant.

Maybe UDP carried inside an IPv4 package?

> > + RSS_CTRL_IPV4_SUPP = (1 << 1),
> > + RSS_CTRL_TCP_IPV6_SUPP = (1 << 2),
> > + RSS_CTRL_IPV6_SUPP = (1 << 3),
> > + RSS_CTRL_IPV6_EXT_SUPP = (1 << 4),
> > + RSS_CTRL_TCP_IPV6_EXT_SUPP = (1 << 5),
> > + RSS_CTRL_UDP_IPV4_SUPP = (1 << 11),
> > + RSS_CTRL_UDP_IPV6_SUPP = (1 << 12),
> > + RSS_CTRL_UDP_IPV6_EXT_SUPP = (1 << 13),
> > + RSS_INDIRECTION_TBL_8125_V2 = 0x4700,
> > + RSS_KEY_8125 = 0x4600,

> > + RxUDPT_v4 = (1 << 19),
> > + RxTCPT_v4 = (1 << 18),
> > + RxUDPF_v4 = (1 << 16), /* UDP/IP checksum failed */
> > + RxTCPF_v4 = (1 << 15), /* TCP/IP checksum failed */

I agree that in general there needs to be better naming. These could
again be referring to IPv4? But the v2 references are clearly not an
IP version.

Andrew