Re: [PATCH 5/6] net: dsa: mv88e6060: add register defines header file

[Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>]

On Nov. Tuesday 10 (46) 03:42 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On 11/10/2015 03:25 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> > Hi Neil,
> > 
> > On Nov. Tuesday 10 (46) 02:25 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> >> To align with the mv88e6xxx code, add a similar header file
> >> with all the register defines.
> >> The file is based on the mv88e6xxx header for coherency.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
> > 
> > In the RFC patchset, Andrew mentioned that there is not that much things in
> > common with mv88e6xxx, so I don't really see a value to add a separate header
> > file. Would that make sense to you guys to add the defines directly in
> > mv88e6060.c and squash that in the last patch?
> > 
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.h | 108 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 108 insertions(+)
> >>  create mode 100644 drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.h
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.h b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.h
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 0000000..adbc894
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.h
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
> >> +/*
> >> + * net/dsa/mv88e6060.h - Marvell 88e6060 switch chip support
> >> + * Copyright (c) 2008 Marvell Semiconductor
> > 
> > Also I don't think the copyright notice is correct here.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > -v
> > 
> Vivien,
> 
> Is something like this OK ?

I'd say yes.

> /*
>  * drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.h - Marvell 88e6060 switch chip support
>  * Copyright (c) 2015 Neil Armstrong
>  *
>  * Based on mv88e6xxx.h
>  * Copyright (c) 2008 Marvell Semiconductor
>  *
>  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>  * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>  * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
>  * (at your option) any later version.
>  */

Thanks Neil,
-v