From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4691CC433FE for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 23:32:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BFA923A1D for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 23:32:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727044AbgLGXcH (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:32:07 -0500 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:43150 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726483AbgLGXcG (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:32:06 -0500 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kmPyO-00AiL5-JO; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:31:16 +0100 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 00:31:16 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn To: Sven Van Asbroeck Cc: Woojung Huh , Microchip Linux Driver Support , Vivien Didelot , Florian Fainelli , Vladimir Oltean , David S Miller , Jakub Kicinski , Helmut Grohne , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1 2/2] net: dsa: microchip: improve port count comments Message-ID: <20201207233116.GB2475764@lunn.ch> References: <20201205152814.7867-1-TheSven73@gmail.com> <20201205152814.7867-2-TheSven73@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201205152814.7867-2-TheSven73@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 10:28:14AM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote: > From: Sven Van Asbroeck > > Port counts in microchip dsa drivers can be quite confusing: > on the ksz8795, ksz_chip_data->port_cnt excludes the cpu port, > yet on the ksz9477, it includes the cpu port. > > Add comments to document this situation explicitly. Rather than document it, we should make it uniform. Unless there is a valid reason to require them to mean different things. Andrew