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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 C7D9FC43331 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:59:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5712196E for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:59:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="MkfeKdMy" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727233AbfKLN7u (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:59:50 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f66.google.com ([209.85.208.66]:46728 "EHLO mail-ed1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726008AbfKLN7u (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:59:50 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f66.google.com with SMTP id x11so14955225eds.13 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 05:59:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=orOPOwRq/CLtduLE0yuNX3V83X6iS4R+sjfuQv+AccU=; b=MkfeKdMyX6OrjYvmjl7FTbIAjqfgFerzMZX4yVe/r4iX27rdVbxhErrV02mjWe8M8M SPNy7e+XqV5gbAxEJa7nUsAqTpdrdKsPUJmTi81Ruy+Uuu/j0f/oclBXeb+fypMjgmb5 ArPlhPdZVWicGOH8aoK9tjJtP4aiYMdqrRh2eK5bzRO/EREaGXw8KbKif1b2Ggq2Xu4o h13hJ1Q55Kh8Jq2Edipzn2ffauviLETEqTBO4vZ/wCaID0kiBnxl+nr9Gi1i/oHglUi6 n+QcCgY1/jcd3hu55QQauyK8sIPsNS03GL47p7B9LhbCgomeZQtQKtxAmIqInrW1euMk hwPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=orOPOwRq/CLtduLE0yuNX3V83X6iS4R+sjfuQv+AccU=; b=iQFkPL7u/GVf0Opydy1lU6KcHWhi2VdnJCXYXpcCvcTgNJYQGyV0UhBlO1rAPhWJ3M IKLSpRnljI/0PC4Z4+tGgwtsTYeCy53IMmlwxMmseq3z9sSHKTJxEbylhtJ/xMyzxRFo q06eCU+KbEFYGdlGI2OldthkhcIEg6M5b1MSqkStF0jZXuekWk4jXb4eCAebxfvCZ985 b7nR/+MJrlaJm/Ohqb4qV7qQ0kEy2coh6ehE2jXKwlWSatYuwdEtWx3Ks46EzYW1GpD6 5uJtnSnsSmSbcRQmudcnjYy+uV7IFIJ62REbTol84tasUyYwhbJ2flqfktLlebm7CLN6 8rSg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWJCBnlowtWg6rGfU4ydQ8oVUNi/8R68UzouwPWatx81tuaZg/m CIUFAY3dzKfjPA+dq3AYzIDk1fQlNtKZjPNVs1s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxJD8qRcBx3EZ3zXm+DLXPofSZu+fDvqJlDZU8Eo2rANUttQC2OByv/ddFvytdYBi8zx2PhtoRDzDy+r/dRzVE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3450:: with SMTP id d16mr15372416ejb.216.1573567188357; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 05:59:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191112124420.6225-1-olteanv@gmail.com> <20191112124420.6225-8-olteanv@gmail.com> <20191112135559.GI5090@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20191112135559.GI5090@lunn.ch> From: Vladimir Oltean Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:59:37 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 07/12] net: mscc: ocelot: separate the implementation of switch reset To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Jakub Kicinski , "David S. Miller" , Alexandre Belloni , Florian Fainelli , Vivien Didelot , Joergen Andreasen , "Allan W. Nielsen" , Horatiu Vultur , Claudiu Manoil , netdev , Vladimir Oltean Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 15:56, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 02:44:15PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > From: Vladimir Oltean > > > > The Felix switch has a different reset procedure, so a function pointer > > needs to be created and added to the ocelot_ops structure. > > > > The reset procedure has been moved into ocelot_init. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean > > --- > > drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c | 3 ++ > > drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.h | 1 + > > drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_board.c | 37 +++++++++++++++--------- > > I'm wondering about the name board. So far, the code you have moved > into ocelot_board has nothing to do with the board as such. This is > not a GPIO used to reset the switch, it is not a regulator, etc. It is > all internal to the device, but just differs per family. Maybe you can > think of a better name? > Alexandre, what do you think? I agree "ocelot_board" is a bit strange. > Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn > > Andrew