Scott Wood <[email protected]> wrote:
> > + void __iomem *fec_fun_code;
> > + void __iomem *fec_r_hash;
> > + void __iomem *fec_x_cntrl;
> > + void __iomem *fec_dma_control;
> > +};
>
> Why void and not the specific type?
Ok, I will fix it for using u32 __iomem *.
> > static void set_promiscuous_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > {
> > struct fs_enet_private *fep = netdev_priv(dev);
> > - fec_t __iomem *fecp = fep->fec.fecp;
> > + struct reg_tbl *fecp = fep->fec.rtbl;
>
> Hmm, having something called "fecp" that is a different type than other
> "fecp"s could be confusing.
Ok, I will use 'regp' instead of 'fecp' then.
> > @@ -134,6 +143,20 @@ static int __devinit fs_enet_mdio_probe(struct
> > of_device *ofdev,
> > if (!fec->fecp)
> > goto out_fec;
> >
> > + if (of_device_is_compatible(ofdev->node, "fsl,mpc5121-fec-mdio")) {
>
> You can put a data pointer in the of_platform match struct, instead of
> re-checking the compatible.
.data pointer in 'fs_enet_mdio_fec_match' is already used for
mpc5xxx_get_bus_frequency(). Setting .data to some sort of FEC ID in
match struct for "fsl,pq1-fec-mdio" would be confusing to.
Would a simple
if (!strncmp(match->compatible, "fsl,mpc5121-fec-mdio",
sizeof(match->compatible))) {
suffice here?
Thanks!
Anatolij
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
