Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Min-Hua Chen <minhuadotchen@gmail.com>
To:     simon.horman@corigine.com
Cc:     alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        edumazet@google.com, joabreu@synopsys.com, kuba@kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, minhuadotchen@gmail.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: use le32_to_cpu for p->des0 and p->des1
Date:   Fri, 19 May 2023 18:53:38 +0800
Message-Id: <20230519105338.4793-1-minhuadotchen@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZGcs1sdy0RTrwNby@corigine.com>
References: <ZGcs1sdy0RTrwNby@corigine.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Simon,

>>  
>>  	if (likely(desc_valid && ts_valid)) {
>> -		if ((p->des0 == 0xffffffff) && (p->des1 == 0xffffffff))
>> +		if ((le32_to_cpu(p->des0) == 0xffffffff) &&
>> +		    (le32_to_cpu(p->des1) == 0xffffffff))
>
>Hi Min-Hua Chen,
>
>I'm not sure if it makes a meaningful difference in practice - and
>certainly it won't on LE systems. But I wonder if it's nicer to do the
>conversion on the constant rather than the variable part of the comparison.
>
>		if ((p->des0 == cpu_to_le32(0xffffffff)) &&
>		    (p->des1 == cpu_to_le32(0xffffffff)))

After reading your suggestion, I think:
the 'p->des0 == cpu_to_le32(0xffffffff)' gives the readers a hint that
p->des0 is __le32 type and I think it is easier (for me) to understand
than 'le32_to_cpu(p->des0) == 0xffffffff'

I will submit v2 for this, thanks for your comment.

thanks,
Min-Hua