linux-can.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dario Binacchi <dariobin@libero.it>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>, linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: c_can: rename IF_RX -> IF_NAPI
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 07:34:05 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <384767683.303063.1628573645349@mail1.libero.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210809080608.171545-1-mkl@pengutronix.de>

Hi Marc,

> Il 09/08/2021 10:06 Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de> ha scritto:
> 
>  
> The C_CAN/D_CAN cores implement 2 interfaces to manage the message
> objects. To avoid concurrency and the need for locking one interface
> is used in the TX path (IF_TX). While the other one, named IF_RX is
> used from NAPI context only. As this interface is not only used to
> manage RX, but also TX message objects, this patch renames IF_RX to
> IF_NAPI.
> 
> Cc: Dario Binacchi <dariobin@libero.it>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> Hey Dario,
> 
> as promised a patch to rename IF_RX -> IF_NAPI.
>

I agree with you. It's the right choice.
Thanks and regards,
Dario
 
> In my current patch stack, I've added this patch before your FIFO
> changes (and updated your patch accordingly), to avoid changing the
> newly added IF_RX in your patch to IF_NAPI in the next patch.
> 
> regards,
> Marc
> 
>  drivers/net/can/c_can/c_can_main.c | 24 +++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/c_can/c_can_main.c b/drivers/net/can/c_can/c_can_main.c
> index e65bd7a9cf1d..a3c2d9ec90f9 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/c_can/c_can_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/c_can/c_can_main.c
> @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@
>  #define IF_MCONT_TX		(IF_MCONT_TXIE | IF_MCONT_EOB)
>  
>  /* Use IF1 for RX and IF2 for TX */
> -#define IF_RX			0
> +#define IF_NAPI			0
>  #define IF_TX			1
>  
>  /* minimum timeout for checking BUSY status */
> @@ -529,13 +529,13 @@ static void c_can_configure_msg_objects(struct net_device *dev)
>  
>  	/* first invalidate all message objects */
>  	for (i = priv->msg_obj_rx_first; i <= priv->msg_obj_num; i++)
> -		c_can_inval_msg_object(dev, IF_RX, i);
> +		c_can_inval_msg_object(dev, IF_NAPI, i);
>  
>  	/* setup receive message objects */
>  	for (i = priv->msg_obj_rx_first; i < priv->msg_obj_rx_last; i++)
> -		c_can_setup_receive_object(dev, IF_RX, i, 0, 0, IF_MCONT_RCV);
> +		c_can_setup_receive_object(dev, IF_NAPI, i, 0, 0, IF_MCONT_RCV);
>  
> -	c_can_setup_receive_object(dev, IF_RX, priv->msg_obj_rx_last, 0, 0,
> +	c_can_setup_receive_object(dev, IF_NAPI, priv->msg_obj_rx_last, 0, 0,
>  				   IF_MCONT_RCV_EOB);
>  }
>  
> @@ -710,11 +710,11 @@ static void c_can_do_tx(struct net_device *dev)
>  		pend &= ~BIT(idx);
>  		obj = idx + priv->msg_obj_tx_first;
>  
> -		/* We use IF_RX interface instead of IF_TX because we
> +		/* We use IF_NAPI interface instead of IF_TX because we
>  		 * are called from c_can_poll(), which runs inside
>  		 * NAPI. We are not transmitting.
>  		 */
> -		c_can_inval_tx_object(dev, IF_RX, obj);
> +		c_can_inval_tx_object(dev, IF_NAPI, obj);
>  		can_get_echo_skb(dev, idx, NULL);
>  		bytes += priv->dlc[idx];
>  		pkts++;
> @@ -766,14 +766,14 @@ static u32 c_can_adjust_pending(u32 pend, u32 rx_mask)
>  static inline void c_can_rx_object_get(struct net_device *dev,
>  				       struct c_can_priv *priv, u32 obj)
>  {
> -	c_can_object_get(dev, IF_RX, obj, priv->comm_rcv_high);
> +	c_can_object_get(dev, IF_NAPI, obj, priv->comm_rcv_high);
>  }
>  
>  static inline void c_can_rx_finalize(struct net_device *dev,
>  				     struct c_can_priv *priv, u32 obj)
>  {
>  	if (priv->type != BOSCH_D_CAN)
> -		c_can_object_get(dev, IF_RX, obj, IF_COMM_CLR_NEWDAT);
> +		c_can_object_get(dev, IF_NAPI, obj, IF_COMM_CLR_NEWDAT);
>  }
>  
>  static int c_can_read_objects(struct net_device *dev, struct c_can_priv *priv,
> @@ -785,10 +785,12 @@ static int c_can_read_objects(struct net_device *dev, struct c_can_priv *priv,
>  		pend &= ~BIT(obj - 1);
>  
>  		c_can_rx_object_get(dev, priv, obj);
> -		ctrl = priv->read_reg(priv, C_CAN_IFACE(MSGCTRL_REG, IF_RX));
> +		ctrl = priv->read_reg(priv, C_CAN_IFACE(MSGCTRL_REG, IF_NAPI));
>  
>  		if (ctrl & IF_MCONT_MSGLST) {
> -			int n = c_can_handle_lost_msg_obj(dev, IF_RX, obj, ctrl);
> +			int n;
> +
> +			n = c_can_handle_lost_msg_obj(dev, IF_NAPI, obj, ctrl);
>  
>  			pkts += n;
>  			quota -= n;
> @@ -803,7 +805,7 @@ static int c_can_read_objects(struct net_device *dev, struct c_can_priv *priv,
>  			continue;
>  
>  		/* read the data from the message object */
> -		c_can_read_msg_object(dev, IF_RX, ctrl);
> +		c_can_read_msg_object(dev, IF_NAPI, ctrl);
>  
>  		c_can_rx_finalize(dev, priv, obj);
>  
> -- 
> 2.30.2

      reply	other threads:[~2021-08-10  5:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-09  8:06 [PATCH] can: c_can: rename IF_RX -> IF_NAPI Marc Kleine-Budde
2021-08-10  5:34 ` Dario Binacchi [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=384767683.303063.1628573645349@mail1.libero.it \
    --to=dariobin@libero.it \
    --cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).