lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 07/12] net: ll_temac: Support indirect_mutex share within TEMAC IP
> 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?

> @@ -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?

Andrew

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-30 00:13    [W:0.150 / U:0.504 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site