From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@freescale.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 16:36:59 +0300
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 7/9] net: tsec: Use portable types and
 accessors for BDs
In-Reply-To: <1380752101.12932.127.camel@snotra.buserror.net>
References: <1380534287-4569-1-git-send-email-claudiu.manoil@freescale.com>
	<1380534287-4569-8-git-send-email-claudiu.manoil@freescale.com>
	<1380583367.24959.551.camel@snotra.buserror.net>
	<524AB42C.7060404@freescale.com>
	<1380653401.10618.19.camel@snotra.buserror.net>
	<524C2AC6.1070202@freescale.com>
	<1380752101.12932.127.camel@snotra.buserror.net>
Message-ID: <524D72FB.6090204@freescale.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 10/3/2013 1:15 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
[snip]
>
> Yeah, it doesn't help when both types of accesses show up when searching
> for the ring, and accessors exist with both possible argument orderings.
> Especially when a driver has custom accessors.
>
> It's OK to use explicit synchronization rather than I/O accessors, if
> you're careful to ensure that it's correct.
>
> It looks like drivers/net/fec_mxc.c in U-Boot is an example that uses
> I/O accessors on ring data, e.g.:
>
> 	writew(length, &fec->tbd_base[fec->tbd_index].data_length);
>

Hi Scott,

I sent a v2 for this patch (the next 2 patches in the series are
not affected by this one):
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/280285/

In this version I dropped the macro usage and used I/O accessors for
the ring data, as discussed.  This approach does not require the
explicit __beNN type for the BD fields, it also removes the need to
declare the BD structures as "volatile" and it's safer because in_be()/
out_be() enforce HW sync.

Thanks,
Claudiu