On 7/3/21 8:32 AM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > On 02/07/2021 14:03, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> What was the issue with patch 9 "dp8393x: fix CAM descriptor entry > index"? That patch ensures that the CAM index is read from the > descriptor, and not taken from the for() loop i.e. it is unrelated to > register access size. No issue, simply nobody reviewed it and I was not confident enough. > See section 4.1.1 "The Load CAM Command" in the > DP83932C datasheet for more information. I'll have a look. The patch could go via Jason's tree or Trivial then.
