RE: [PATCH net v4 2/3] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: Improvements to error recovery

[Selvamani Rajagopal <Selvamani.Rajagopal@onsemi.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parthiban Veerasooran <parthiban.veerasooran@microchip.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2026 3:09 AM
> 
> Imperative mood for the subject: "Improve error recovery" (netdev
> convention).

Done

> 
> On 21/07/26 7:50 am, Selvamani Rajagopal via B4 Relay wrote:
> > size = end_byte_offset + 1;
> > oa_tc6_prcs_rx_frame_end(tc6, data, size);
> oa_tc6_prcs_rx_frame_end() now returns int, but this drops the return —
> every other call in this patch propagates it. Is it deliberate?

Yes. We are not checking the return code on purpose. (Indirect) Answer is in the 
comment below. I will change the comment to mention this specifically for clarity.

> > +
> > + /* Purpose of rx_buf_overflow is make the
> > + * code to look for new frame. At this
> > + * stage, we have a new frame to process.
> > + * So, making it false, in case it is set
> > + * to true by oa_tc6_prcs_rx_frame_end.
> > + */
> > - return 0;



> > + return oa_tc6_prcs_ongoing_rx_frame(tc6, data, footer);
> footer is unused here. Either drop the unused parameter or a note why it
> stays.

I was surprised too as I don't remember adding it. When I checked, It was there before.

> 
> Best regards,
> Parthiban V
> > }
> >