On Tue, 12 May 2015 17:12:00 +0400 Ivan Mikhaylov <[email protected]> wrote: >>On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 17:12 +0400, Ivan Mikhaylov wrote: >> Fix in send of emac regs dump to ethtool which >> causing wrong data interpretation on ethtool >> layer for MII and EMAC. > >Please provide a better explanation. You removed the difference >in register space size between EMAC and EMAC4, why ? You also changed a >test regarding which version of the structure to use from EMAC4 to >EMAC4SYNC, why ?
So, as I understand right, we have EMAC, EMAC4, EMAC4SYNC chips right now? But within driver structure there are only EMAC4/EMAC4SYNC that I'm seeing or is it include and EMAC? I thought that only EMAC4/EMAC4SYNC we have. Anyway we have bug in ethtool, there size of emac_regs is defined and if we will provide wrong size of emac_regs structure that will cause problems in showing of some emac_regs fields for emac4sync + MII layer. Plus size of register space can be different on different platforms so because of this I removed macroses which doing this right from it. So just for example we have 0x100 for emac4sync in dts file, sizeof on ethtool is 152 always for emac_regs and we're reading MII values from emac area where is no data for MII. I have to add emac4sync support to ethtool regdump as I see in plus to EMAC/EMAC4. What your opinion on this? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
