Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.34 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.34;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231025173300.1776832-1-florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
 <20231025173300.1776832-5-florian.fainelli@broadcom.com> <CAMZ6RqJJXK5EyyOwXXbdA-bDTY=_JQ+xfKpoCHDJZqv+rNnASQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZ6Rq+iBazJ+fM5yd5Tfa8==DEGV93iD-XojU=f1m3ScSGEww@mail.gmail.com> <e6bd1a85-0bcf-457c-8fa8-33e68d818547@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <e6bd1a85-0bcf-457c-8fa8-33e68d818547@broadcom.com>
From:   Vincent MAILHOL <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:50:25 +0900
Message-ID: <CAMZ6Rq+HK8Ps2QZsqi1C5Dgjn=EDhT5hWks=T02x5AMqzXkNhw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] net: phy: broadcom: Add support for WAKE_FILTER
To:     Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, Doug Berger <opendmb@gmail.com>,
        Broadcom internal kernel review list 
        <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>,
        Gal Pressman <gal@nvidia.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
        Daniil Tatianin <d-tatianin@yandex-team.ru>,
        Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
        Justin Chen <justin.chen@broadcom.com>,
        Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@marvell.com>,
        Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri. 27 Oct. 2023 at 02:55, Florian Fainelli
<florian.fainelli@broadcom.com> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On 10/25/23 19:13, Vincent MAILHOL wrote:
> [snip]
> >>
> >> This looks like an endianness conversion (I can not tell if this is
> >> big to little or the opposite)...
> >
> > Oopsy! On second look, this is an open coded cpu to big endian
> > conversion. So the question I should have asked is:
> >
> >    why not use the put_unaligned_be16() helper here?
>
> Because this is consistent with the existing code, though I will keep
> that suggestion in mind as a subsequent patch. I personally find it
> clearer expressed that way, but can update.

Fair enough. I agree that this is not something to be fixed in this series.

For your future consideration, I would have done it as:

        __be16 da[ETH_ALEN / sizeof(__be16)];
        /* ... */
        da[i] = cpu_to_be16(~ret);

da[] can eventually be casted back to u8 * once populated.

(...)