lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next] drivers: net: cpsw: make cpsw_ale.c a module to allow re-use on Keystone
* Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@ti.com> [150205 14:37]:
> On 02/02/2015 11:40 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >* Arnd Bergmann<arnd@arndb.de> [150129 15:51]:
> >>On Thursday 29 January 2015 18:15:51 Murali Karicheri wrote:
> >>>NetCP on Keystone has cpsw ale function similar to other TI SoCs
> >>>and this driver is re-used. To allow both ti cpsw and keystone netcp
> >>>to re-use the driver, convert the cpsw ale to a module and configure
> >>>it through Kconfig option CONFIG_TI_CPSW_ALE. Currently it is statically
> >>>linked to both TI CPSW and NetCP and this causes issues when the above
> >>>drivers are built as dynamic modules. This patch addresses this issue
> >>>
> >>>While at it, fix the Makefile and code to build both netcp_core and
> >>>netcp_ethss as dynamic modules. This is needed to support arm allmodconfig.
> >>>This also requires exporting of API calls provided by netcp_core so that
> >>>both the above can be dynamic modules.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Murali Karicheri<m-karicheri2@ti.com>
> >>>---
> >>> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/Kconfig | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
> >>> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/Makefile | 8 +++++---
> >>> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_ale.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/netcp_core.c | 8 ++++++++
> >>> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/netcp_ethss.c | 5 +++++
> >>> 5 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>I was hoping there would be a way without exporting all those symbols, but
> >>I also couldn't come up with a better solution. I'm putting this into the
> >>randconfig build test for now, but I'm guessing it's fine.
> >
> >Probably the best way in the long run is to add a single exported
> >function to cpsw-common.c I just added for the MAC address function.
>
> If understand correctly, what you have done is moved the common mac function
> and exported the function in cpsw-common.c and called it from cpsw.c. How is
> this any different from exporting all common functions from cpsw_ale.c as is
> done today? Not sure what you meant by a single exported function. Are you
> talking about defining a ale_ops struct of function ptrs and exporting that
> instead of individual functions? So
>
> cpsw_ale_common.c
> Move all of the common functions here and define them as static.
> Defined cpsw_ale_ops and export it.
> cpsw.c and netcp_ethss.c calls something like
>
> cpsw_ale_ops.foo();

Yeah something like that. I was thinking struct cpsw_common with
shared function pointers. Then in cpsw-common.c, export cpsw_register()
and cpsw_free() that the cpsw like drivers can use to configure whatever
combination of cpsw shared functions it can use. It could be naturally
more than one struct, or maybe struct cpsw_ale, struct cpdma and struct
netcp could be within the struct cpsw_common.

I only attempted to set up a place for future cpsw code sharing
with cpsw-common.c. I have not identified what all could be shared,
looks like you have a much better idea about that :)

By registering cpsw like drivers with cpsw-common allows exporting
only a few selected functions instead of exporting tons of custom
functions (currently 43 of them).

Regards,

Tony


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-02-09 18:01    [W:0.062 / U:9.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site