On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 03:41:20PM -0500, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> writes:
>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/mv88e6xxx.h
> >> b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/mv88e6xxx.h
> >> index ab52c37..9e51405 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/mv88e6xxx.h
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/mv88e6xxx.h
> >> @@ -765,6 +765,9 @@ struct mv88e6xxx_ops {
> >> int (*phy_write)(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int addr, int reg,
> >> u16 val);
> >>
> >> + /* Switch Software Reset */
> >> + int (*reset)(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip);
> >> +
> >
> > Hi Vivien
> >
> > In my huge patch series of 6390, i've been using a g1_ prefix for
> > functionality which is in global 1, g2_ for global 2, etc. This has
> > worked for everything so far with the exception of setting which
> > reserved MAC addresses should be sent to the CPU. Most devices have it
> > in g2, but 6390 has it in g1.
> >
> > Please could you add the prefix.
>
> I don't understand. It looks like you are talking about the second part
> of the comment I made on your RFC patchset, about the Rsvd2CPU feature:
Hi Vivien
I mean
+ /* Switch Software Reset */
+ int (*g1_reset)(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip);
+
We have a collection of function pointers with port_ prefix, another
collection with stats_, and a third with ppu_, etc. And then we have
some which do not fit a specific category. Those i have prefixed with
g1_ or g2_. I think we should have some prefix, and that is my
suggestion.
Andrew
