On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 06:09:39PM +, Stefan Chulski wrote:
> > > > > + } else {
> > > > > + priv->sram_pool = of_gen_pool_get(dn, "cm3-mem", 0);
> > > > > + if (!priv->sram_pool) {
> > > > > + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "DT is too old, TX FC
> > > > di
> > > > + } else {
> > > > + priv->sram_pool = of_gen_pool_get(dn, "cm3-mem", 0);
> > > > + if (!priv->sram_pool) {
> > > > + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "DT is too old, TX FC
> > > disabled\n");
> > >
> > > I don't see anything in this patch that di
On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 05:57:14PM +, Stefan Chulski wrote:
> > > + } else {
> > > + priv->sram_pool = of_gen_pool_get(dn, "cm3-mem", 0);
> > > + if (!priv->sram_pool) {
> > > + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "DT is too old, TX FC
> > disabled\n");
> >
> > I don't see any
> > + } else {
> > + priv->sram_pool = of_gen_pool_get(dn, "cm3-mem", 0);
> > + if (!priv->sram_pool) {
> > + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "DT is too old, TX FC
> disabled\n");
>
> I don't see anything in this patch that disables TX flow control, which means
> this
>
> > > Should there be -EPROBE_DEFER handling in here somewhere? The SRAM
> > > is a device, so it might not of been probed yet?
> >
>
> > No, firmware probed during bootloader boot and we can use SRAM. SRAM
> > memory can be safely used.
>
> A previous patch added:
>
> + CP11X_L
> > Should there be -EPROBE_DEFER handling in here somewhere? The SRAM is a
> > device, so it might not of been probed yet?
>
> No, firmware probed during bootloader boot and we can use SRAM. SRAM
> memory can be safely used.
A previous patch added:
+ CP11X_LABEL(cm3_sram): cm3@22
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Lunn
> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2021 7:05 PM
> To: Stefan Chulski
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; thomas.petazz...@bootlin.com;
> da...@davemloft.net; Nadav Haklai ; Yan Markman
> ; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; k...@kernel.org;
> li...@armlinux.org.u
