Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 1 May 2019 22:25:00 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
Cc:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <Rasmus.Villemoes@prevas.se>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] net: dsa: implement vtu_getnext and
 vtu_loadpurge for mv88e6250
Message-ID: <20190501202500.GE19809@lunn.ch>
References: <20190501193126.19196-1-rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
 <20190501193126.19196-5-rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190501193126.19196-5-rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 07:32:13PM +0000, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> These are almost identical to the 6185 variants, but have fewer bits
> for the FID.
> 
> Bit 10 of the VTU_OP register (offset 0x05) is the VidPolicy bit,
> which one should probably preserve in mv88e6xxx_g1_vtu_op(), instead
> of always writing a 0. However, on the 6352 family, that bit is
> located at bit 12 in the VTU FID register (offset 0x02), and is always
> unconditionally cleared by the mv88e6xxx_g1_vtu_fid_write()
> function.
> 
> Since nothing in the existing driver seems to know or care about that
> bit, it seems reasonable to not add the boilerplate to preserve it for
> the 6250 (which would require adding a chip-specific vtu_op function,
> or adding chip-quirks to the existing one).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>

Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>

    Andrew