On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Rafał Miłecki <zaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 August 2016 at 13:34, Rafał Miłecki <zaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 8 July 2016 at 01:08, Jon Mason <jon.ma...@broadcom.com> wrote:
>>>         mode = (bgmac_read(bgmac, BGMAC_DEV_STATUS) & BGMAC_DS_MM_MASK) >>
>>>                 BGMAC_DS_MM_SHIFT;
>>> -       if (ci->id != BCMA_CHIP_ID_BCM47162 || mode != 0)
>>> +       if (bgmac->feature_flags & BGMAC_FEAT_CLKCTLST || mode != 0)
>>>                 bgmac_set(bgmac, BCMA_CLKCTLST, BCMA_CLKCTLST_FORCEHT);
>>> -       if (ci->id == BCMA_CHIP_ID_BCM47162 && mode == 2)
>>> +       if (bgmac->feature_flags & BGMAC_FEAT_CLKCTLST && mode == 2)
>>>                 bcma_chipco_chipctl_maskset(&bgmac->core->bus->drv_cc, 1, 
>>> ~0,
>>>                                             BGMAC_CHIPCTL_1_RXC_DLL_BYPASS);
>>
>> Jon, it looks to me you translated two following conditions:
>> ci->id != BCMA_CHIP_ID_BCM47162
>> and
>> ci->id == BCMA_CHIP_ID_BCM47162
>> into the same flag check:
>> bgmac->feature_flags & BGMAC_FEAT_CLKCTLST
>>
>> I don't think it's intentional, is it? Do you have a moment to fix this?
>
> Ping

Sorry, just seeing this now.  I'll double check the original code and
verify it (or fix it).

Thanks,
Jon

>
> --
> Rafał

Reply via email to