Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
From:   Rohan G Thomas <rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
To:     Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>
Cc:     alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, conor+dt@kernel.org,
        davem@davemloft.net, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        edumazet@google.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org,
        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, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        pabeni@redhat.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        Rohan G Thomas <rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v3 2/2] net: stmmac: Tx coe sw fallback
Date:   Tue, 15 Aug 2023 11:51:45 +0800
Message-Id: <20230815035145.16990-1-rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230814181354.8603-1-rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
References: <20230814181354.8603-1-rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

From: Rohan G Thomas <rohan.g.thomas@intel.com>
Date: Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 15:06:37
> > > +	bool tx_q_coe_lmt;
> >
> > Please use a flag here instead of "tx_q_coe_lmt". This is the
> > preferrable method now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jose
> 
> Thanks Jose for the feedback. If I read that correctly, your suggestion is to
> change " tx_q_coe_lmt" to something more readable, like "has_txcoe_limit".
> Please correct me if I understand it wrongly.
> 
> BR,
> Rohan
>

Or, use int instead of bool?

BR,
Rohan