mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
Cc: "barebox@lists.infradead.org" <barebox@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/20] e1000: Add functions for register polling
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:32:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160120073218.GL13058@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHQ1cqHB6=OLR0vBNK8UA1ty0t1LpBsoJ95H9m=GqYy7ZKOuNw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:53:07AM -0800, Andrey Smirnov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 07:52:37PM -0800, Andrey Smirnov wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
> >> index 291e64d..5e24758 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
> >> @@ -2176,5 +2176,24 @@ static inline uint32_t e1000_read_reg(struct e1000_hw *hw, uint32_t reg)
> >>  }
> >>
> >>
> >> +static inline int e1000_poll_reg(struct e1000_hw *hw, uint32_t reg,
> >> +                              uint32_t mask, uint32_t value,
> >> +                              uint64_t timeout)
> >
> > We should let the compiler decide whether to inline this or not. Can we
> > remove the inline?
> 
> In general the reason I put "inline" when defining functions in
> headers -- that is not to say that it applies in this case -- is
> because that tells the compiler that the code for function doesn't
> have to put in the object file if no one is using it. Otherwise when
> .c that doesn't reference includes .h with static non-inline function
> that nobody uses GCC might emit a warning about unused function.

I didn't realize this function is in the header file. Can we put it in
the C file?

> 
> I'd love to do that. How do you feel about getting rid of
> E1000_READ_REG and E1000_WRITE_REG?

Good idea. I'm all in for that.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-20  7:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1453089161-6697-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 02/20] e1000: Fix a bug in e1000_detect_gig_phy Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 03/20] e1000: Remove unnecessary variable Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 04/20] e1000: Do not read same register twice Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 05/20] e1000: Remove unneeded i210 specific register code Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 06/20] e1000: Consolidate register offset fixups Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 07/20] e1000: Remove 'use_eewr' parameter Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 08/20] e1000: Remove 'page_size' Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 09/20] e1000: Simplify EEPROM init for e1000_80003es2lan Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 10/20] e1000: Simplify EEPROM init for e1000_igb Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 11/20] e1000: Consolidate SPI EEPROM init code Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 12/20] e1000: Consolidate Microwire " Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 13/20] e1000: Fix a bug in e1000_probe() Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 14/20] e1000: Remove unnecessary intialization Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 15/20] e1000: Refactor Flash/EEPROM reading code Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 16/20] e1000: Add functions for register polling Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-19  8:21   ` Sascha Hauer
2016-01-19 18:53     ` Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-20  7:32       ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 17/20] e1000: Properly release SW_FW_SYNC semaphore bits Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 18/20] e1000: Add EEPROM access locking for i210 Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 19/20] e1000: Expose i210's external flash as MTD Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 20/20] e1000: Expose i210's iNVM as a cdev Andrey Smirnov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160120073218.GL13058@pengutronix.de \
    --to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \
    --cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox