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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 BFCD0C55178 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 14:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC4D208E4 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 14:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1416885AbgJYOra (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2020 10:47:30 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:43508 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1415756AbgJYOr3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2020 10:47:29 -0400 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kWhIo-003RJA-Vi; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 15:47:22 +0100 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 15:47:22 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn To: Tom Rix Cc: Xu Yilun , jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, mdf@kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, lgoncalv@redhat.com, hao.wu@intel.com, Russ Weight Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/6] ethernet: dfl-eth-group: add DFL eth group private feature driver Message-ID: <20201025144722.GF792004@lunn.ch> References: <1603442745-13085-1-git-send-email-yilun.xu@intel.com> <1603442745-13085-6-git-send-email-yilun.xu@intel.com> <326cf423-33ef-1fea-86c5-1b5245eadddf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <326cf423-33ef-1fea-86c5-1b5245eadddf@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org > > +u64 read_mac_stats(struct eth_com *ecom, unsigned int addr) > > +{ > > + u32 data_l, data_h; > > + > > + if (eth_com_read_reg(ecom, addr, &data_l) || > > + eth_com_read_reg(ecom, addr + 1, &data_h)) > > + return 0xffffffffffffffffULL; > return -1; ? Since this is a u64 function, i expect you get a compiler warning. Maybe only with W=1. It is better to use U64_MAX. Andrew