Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Mar 2024 09:36:59 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: add regmap_range for KSZ9563 chip | From | Florian Fainelli <> |
| |
On 3/8/24 02:50, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > Add register validation for KSZ9563. > > Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de> > --- > drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 121 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c > index 030b167764b39..2308be3bdc9d8 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c > @@ -666,6 +666,125 @@ static const struct regmap_access_table ksz8563_register_set = { > .n_yes_ranges = ARRAY_SIZE(ksz8563_valid_regs), > }; > > +static const struct regmap_range ksz9563_valid_regs[] = {
Missing comment to describe those are global registers, and not per-port registers?
> + regmap_reg_range(0x0000, 0x0003), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0006, 0x0006), > + regmap_reg_range(0x000f, 0x000f), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0010, 0x001f), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0100, 0x0100), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0104, 0x0107), > + regmap_reg_range(0x010d, 0x010d), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0110, 0x0113), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0120, 0x012b), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0201, 0x0201), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0210, 0x0213), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0300, 0x0300), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0302, 0x030b), > + regmap_reg_range(0x030e, 0x031b), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0320, 0x032b), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0330, 0x0336), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0338, 0x033b), > + regmap_reg_range(0x033e, 0x033e), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0340, 0x035f), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0370, 0x0370), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0378, 0x0378), > + regmap_reg_range(0x037c, 0x037d), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0390, 0x0393), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0400, 0x040e), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0410, 0x042f), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0500, 0x0519), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0520, 0x054b), > + regmap_reg_range(0x0550, 0x05b3), > + > + /* port 1 */ > + regmap_reg_range(0x1000, 0x1001),
Seems like adding a macro that encapsulates all per-port register ranges would help a bit?
Other than that, LGTM! -- Florian
| |