From: Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 6:57 PM
> To: Fugang Duan <fugang.d...@nxp.com>
> Cc: Greg Ungerer <g...@uclinux.org>; Troy Kisky
> <troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com>; netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fec: stop the "rcv is not +last, " error messages
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Fugang Duan <fugang.d...@nxp.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Fabio, we cannot do it like this that may cause confused for the quirk flag
> "FEC_QUIRK_HAS_RACC".
>
> We can treat FEC_QUIRK_HAS_RACC flag as "this is a non-Coldfire SoC".
>
FEC_QUIRK_HAS_RACC means the HW support "Receive Accelerator Function
Configuration". It is really make somebody confused.
To save trouble, you treat FEC_QUIRK_HAS_RACC flag as "this is a non-Coldfire
SoC", you must add comment on the flag define.
> >
> >
> > Hi, Greg,
> >
> > The header file fec.h define the FEC_FTRL as below, if ColdFire SoC has no
> > this
> register, we may remove the define in here and define the register according
> to SOC type. For example, it is ColdFire Soc, define it as 0xFFF. Is it
> feasible ?
> >
>
> This is even worse IMHO. We should not write to a 'fake' register offset of
> 0xFFF.
We can do it like this:
#if defined(CONFIG_ARM)
writel(PKT_MAXBUF_SIZE, fep->hwp + FEC_FTRL);
#endif
