> +/* Support 10, 100, 200, 1000, 2500, 5000, 10000 Mbps (e.g. 88E6393X)
> + * This function adds new speed 5000 supported by Amethyst family.
> + * Function mv88e6xxx_port_set_speed_duplex() can't be used as the register
> + * values for speeds 2500 & 5000 conflict.
> + */
Thanks, that should stop my or somebody else trying to wrong combine
them.
> +/* Offset 0x10 & 0x11: EPC */
> +
> +static int mv88e6393x_epc_wait_ready(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int port)
> +{
> + int bit = __bf_shf(MV88E6393X_PORT_EPC_CMD_BUSY);
> +
> + return mv88e6xxx_port_wait_bit(chip, port, MV88E6393X_PORT_EPC_CMD,
> bit, 0);
> +}
To follow the naming convention, this should really be called
mv88e6393x_port_epc_wait_ready
> +int mv88e6393x_serdes_irq_enable(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int port,
> + int lane, bool enable)
It can be hard to tell in a diff, but the indentation looks wrong
here. 'int lane' should line up with 'struct'.
> +{
> + u8 cmode = chip->ports[port].cmode;
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + switch (cmode) {
> + case MV88E6XXX_PORT_STS_CMODE_SGMII:
> + case MV88E6XXX_PORT_STS_CMODE_1000BASEX:
> + case MV88E6XXX_PORT_STS_CMODE_2500BASEX:
> + case MV88E6XXX_PORT_STS_CMODE_5GBASER:
> + case MV88E6XXX_PORT_STS_CMODE_10GBASER:
> + err = mv88e6390_serdes_irq_enable_sgmii(chip, lane, enable);
> + }
> +
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> +irqreturn_t mv88e6393x_serdes_irq_status(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int
> port,
> + int lane)
Maybe here as well?
> +int mv88e6393x_setup_errata(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip)
It should have _serdes_ in the name to follow the naming convention.
Andrew
