On 12/08/2018 12:34 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 07:18:43PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> From: Tristram Ha
>>
>> Factor out common code from the tag_ksz , so that the code can be used
>> with other KSZ family switches which use differenly sized tags.
>
> I prefer this implemen
> So this ksz_tag_ops is still not acceptable? As I understand the kernel is
> using this mechanism all over the places.
Hi Tristram
It is used all other the place, but generally, not in the hot path,
just the control plain.
> What is left is a direct copying of the transmit and receive functio
On 12/10/2018 09:32 PM, tristram...@microchip.com wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 07:18:43PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> From: Tristram Ha
>>>
>>> Factor out common code from the tag_ksz , so that the code can be used
>>> with other KSZ family switches which use differenly sized tags.
>>
>> I
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 07:18:43PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > From: Tristram Ha
> >
> > Factor out common code from the tag_ksz , so that the code can be used
> > with other KSZ family switches which use differenly sized tags.
>
> I prefer this implementation over what Tristram recently subm
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 07:18:43PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> From: Tristram Ha
>
> Factor out common code from the tag_ksz , so that the code can be used
> with other KSZ family switches which use differenly sized tags.
I prefer this implementation over what Tristram recently submitted. It
is
