Messages in this thread | | | From | Esben Haabendal <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/12] net: ll_temac: Support indirect_mutex share within TEMAC IP | Date | Tue, 30 Apr 2019 08:54:21 +0200 |
| |
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> writes:
>> For OF devices, the xlnx,compound parent of the temac node should be >> used to find siblings, and setup a shared indirect_mutex between them. >> I will leave this work to somebody else, as I don't have hardware to >> test that. No regression is introduced by that, as before this commit >> using two Ethernet interfaces in same TEMAC block is simply broken. > > Is that true?
Ouch, it was in v1. But I messed up here in v2. I will fix for v3.
>> @@ -1092,7 +1092,16 @@ static int temac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> lp->dev = &pdev->dev; >> lp->options = XTE_OPTION_DEFAULTS; >> spin_lock_init(&lp->rx_lock); >> - mutex_init(&lp->indirect_mutex); >> + >> + /* Setup mutex for synchronization of indirect register access */ >> + if (pdata) { >> + if (!pdata->indirect_mutex) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, >> + "indirect_mutex missing in platform_data\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + lp->indirect_mutex = pdata->indirect_mutex; >> + } > > In the OF case, isn't lp->indirect_mutex now a NULL pointer, where as > before it was a valid mutex? > > Or did i miss something somewhere?
No, you did not miss something. But I did messed up the OF case in v2 of this series. Sorry.
/Esben
| |