Hi Ferruh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yigit, Ferruh
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 7:59 PM
> To: Sun, GuinanX <guinanx....@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Mateusz Kowalski <mateusz.kowal...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/21] net/ixgbe/base: hange flow for "Apply
> Update" command
>
> On 6/12/2020 4:23 AM, Guinan Sun wrote:
> > For the "Apply Update" command the firmware does not given an
> > response. For this command, success should be return. Based on
> > information at EAS.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mateusz Kowalski <mateusz.kowal...@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Guinan Sun <guinanx....@intel.com>
>
> <...>
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > index 0470b1dfc..33ca659cd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_type.h
> > @@ -4366,4 +4366,16 @@ struct ixgbe_hw {
> > #define IXGBE_NW_MNG_IF_SEL_MDIO_PHY_ADD \
> > (0x1F <<
> IXGBE_NW_MNG_IF_SEL_MDIO_PHY_ADD_SHIFT)
> >
> > +/* Code Command (Flash I/F Interface) */
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_FLASH_READ_CMD 0x30
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_SHADOW_RAM_READ_CMD
> 0x31
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_FLASH_WRITE_CMD
> 0x32
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_SHADOW_RAM_WRITE_CMD
> 0x33
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_FLASH_MODULE_UPDATE_CMD
> 0x34
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_FLASH_BLOCK_EREASE_CMD
> 0x35
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_SHADOW_RAM_DUMP_CMD
> 0x36
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_FLASH_INFO_CMD 0x37
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_APPLY_UPDATE_CMD
> 0x38
> > +#define IXGBE_HOST_INTERFACE_MASK_CMD
> 0x000000FF
> > +
> > #endif /* _IXGBE_TYPE_H_ */
> >
>
> Previous patch uses these commands in a hardcoded way, since we are adding
> defines, why not them in the previous patch so we can use the macros in
> previous patch?
I agree with you.
V2 patch we will split this patch into two parts.
The part about macrow will be merged into the previous patch.
