From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFD58C43219 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 22:12:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B695D2075E for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 22:12:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=lunn.ch header.i=@lunn.ch header.b="2hRLVDtn" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729545AbfD2WMS (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:12:18 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:49200 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728105AbfD2WMS (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:12:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lunn.ch; s=20171124; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=2kYkuKi0eOi4EYkCSiWnO4OUux0YvrH2tW6GujbRqCs=; b=2hRLVDtny6Qt8FRmT6UY1Oof3n W5apgJ71EVRR40X57FKFYkcR1OIKXEkS9KJElQaivoDR7qLI/wVxh+dh3LqG2Qod3CF0yHRodRUZu wb8peKzgbFeRZyfjpKSKux5kho815tUrSunuH6Pjo3x8ENtAY9hk1l/qFdnkeYE4DiAo=; Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hLEVI-0007Pi-8O; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:12:04 +0200 Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:12:04 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Esben Haabendal Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Michal Simek , Luis Chamberlain , YueHaibing , Yang Wei , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] net: ll_temac: Support indirect_mutex share within TEMAC IP Message-ID: <20190429221204.GN12333@lunn.ch> References: <20190426073231.4008-1-esben@geanix.com> <20190429083422.4356-1-esben@geanix.com> <20190429083422.4356-8-esben@geanix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190429083422.4356-8-esben@geanix.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > For OF devices, the xlnx,compound parent of the temac node should be > used to find siblings, and setup a shared indirect_mutex between them. > I will leave this work to somebody else, as I don't have hardware to > test that. No regression is introduced by that, as before this commit > using two Ethernet interfaces in same TEMAC block is simply broken. Is that true? > @@ -1092,7 +1092,16 @@ static int temac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > lp->dev = &pdev->dev; > lp->options = XTE_OPTION_DEFAULTS; > spin_lock_init(&lp->rx_lock); > - mutex_init(&lp->indirect_mutex); > + > + /* Setup mutex for synchronization of indirect register access */ > + if (pdata) { > + if (!pdata->indirect_mutex) { > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, > + "indirect_mutex missing in platform_data\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + lp->indirect_mutex = pdata->indirect_mutex; > + } In the OF case, isn't lp->indirect_mutex now a NULL pointer, where as before it was a valid mutex? Or did i miss something somewhere? Andrew