On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 7:03 AM Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zh...@nxp.com> wrote:
>
> If clear GMAC_CONFIG_TE bit, it would stop all tx channels, but users
> may only want to stop secific tx channel.
secific -> specific
>
> Fixes: 48863ce5940f ("stmmac: add DMA support for GMAC 4.xx")
> Signed-off-by: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zh...@nxp.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_lib.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_lib.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_lib.c
> index 0b4ee2dbb691..71e50751ef2d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_lib.c
> @@ -53,10 +53,6 @@ void dwmac4_dma_stop_tx(void __iomem *ioaddr, u32 chan)
>
> value &= ~DMA_CONTROL_ST;
> writel(value, ioaddr + DMA_CHAN_TX_CONTROL(chan));
> -
> - value = readl(ioaddr + GMAC_CONFIG);
> - value &= ~GMAC_CONFIG_TE;
> - writel(value, ioaddr + GMAC_CONFIG);
Is it safe to partially unwind the actions of dwmac4_dma_start_tx
And would the same reasoning apply to dwmac4_(dma_start|stop)_rx?
