qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] net/bitbang_mdio: Generalize etraxfs MDIO b


From: Grant Likely
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] net/bitbang_mdio: Generalize etraxfs MDIO bitbanging emulation
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:21:43 -0400

On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 13:51:02 +0100, "Edgar E. Iglesias" <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 06:28:10PM -0400, Grant Likely wrote:
> > The etraxfs Ethernet model implements quite a nice bitbanging core. The
> > change splits it out into a separate .c file. There are no functional
> > changes here, just movement of code and reformatting to match qemu
> > coding standards.
> 
> Hi Grant!
> 
> It makes sense to move it out.
> 
> A few comments:
> * Maybe we could separate the phy models from the bus model/infrastructure.
> I.e, the qemu_mdio parts into one file and the qemu_phy into another one.
> That way we can add other phy models and keep things separated.

That makes sense too, but it should be done as a follow on patch. That
keeps the factoring out as a single logical block of code.

> * Not sure bitbang_ makes sense in the naming, the abstraction supports
> both the bit twiddeling model with MDIO cycles but also a higher level
> transactional version (mdio_write_req etc) that bypass the cycle accuracy.
> The latter is useful for modeling NICs that have MDIO support in hw, e.g
> like the hw/xilinx_axienet.c while beeing able to reuse the PHY models.

axienet and etraxfs implementations are subtely different (as you know).
I originally was going to do both, but I didn't want to mix
functionality changes in with the factoring out. Doing both at the same
time would have required (slight) behavour changes in one of the models,
so instead I decided to do only one to keep it simple with the other
being a follow-on.

> I realize I should have done this split when doing the axienet model, sorry..

Can you help me out with a patch that migrates axienet to the new common
code?

Thanks,
g.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]