Hi Sergei,
On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 6:28 PM, Sergei Shtylyov
<sergei.shtyl...@cogentembedded.com> wrote:
> The TSU_QTAG0/1 registers found in the Gigabit Ether controllers actually
> have the same long name as the TSU_QTAGM0/1 registers in the early Ether
> controllers: Qtag Addition/Deletion Set Register (Port 0/1 to 1/0); thus
> there's no need to make a difference in sh_eth_tsu_init() between those
> controllers. Unfortunately, we can't just remove TSU_QTAG0/1 from the
> register *enum* because that would break the ethtool register dump...
>
> Fixes: b0ca2a21f769 ("sh_eth: Add support of SH7763 to sh_eth")
> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtyl...@cogentembedded.com>
Thanks for your patch!
> --- net-next.orig/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c
> +++ net-next/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c
> @@ -2097,8 +2097,6 @@ static size_t __sh_eth_get_regs(struct n
> add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSL0);
> add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSL1);
> add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSLC);
> - add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAG0);
> - add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAG1);
Shouldn't you keep the above for ethtool register dump?
> add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAGM0);
> add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAGM1);
> add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSR);
> --- net-next.orig/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.h
> +++ net-next/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.h
> @@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ enum {
> TSU_FWSL0,
> TSU_FWSL1,
> TSU_FWSLC,
> - TSU_QTAG0,
> - TSU_QTAG1,
> + TSU_QTAG0, /* Same as TSU_QTAGM0 */
> + TSU_QTAG1, /* Same as TSU_QTAGM1 */
> TSU_QTAGM0,
> TSU_QTAGM1,
> TSU_FWSR,
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
