Re: Re: [net-next v4 2/3] net: ethernet: mtk_eth_soc: add consts for irq index

[Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:24:57AM +0000, Frank Wunderlich wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2025 um 10:36
> > Von: "Simon Horman" <horms@kernel.org>
> > Betreff: Re: [net-next v4 2/3] net: ethernet: mtk_eth_soc: add consts for irq index
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 10:07:35AM +0200, Frank Wunderlich wrote:
> > > From: Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@public-files.de>
> > > 
> > > Use consts instead of fixed integers for accessing IRQ array.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@public-files.de>
> > > ---
> > > v4:
> > > - calculate max from last (rx) irq index and use it for array size too
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
> 
> thanks for review and the RB
> 
> i thinking about changing the const names to this:
> 
> MTK_ETH_IRQ_SHARED	=> MTK_FE_IRQ_SHARED
> MTK_ETH_IRQ_TX		=> MTK_FE_IRQ_TX
> MTK_ETH_IRQ_RX		=> MTK_FE_IRQ_RX
> MTK_ETH_IRQ_MAX		=> MTK_FE_IRQ_NUM
> 
> because of i currently working on RSS/LRO patches and here MTK_FE_IRQ_NUM is used as name 
> with same meaning like my current MTK_ETH_IRQ_MAX (where max should be same as RX and NUM
> is one more because it is a count).
> Current IRQs also target the MTK frame-engine which is different to the PDMA RX engine
> used for RSS/LRO later, so MTK_ETH_IRQ_RX and MTK_ETH_IRQ_MAX are maybe misleading when RSS/LRO 
> support will come in.
> 
> can i change the consts like this and keep your RB?

Yes, no objections from my side.