Subject: Re: RFC: igb: Intel 82575 gigabit ethernet driver (take #2)

From: Jeff Garzik <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:33:13 -0500

Looks pretty decent.  Main comments (style mostly, driver operation path 
seems sound):

* kill the bitfields and unions [in descriptor structs].  they are not 
endian-safe as presented, generate poor code, and are otherwise undesirable.

* the basic operations are too verbose:  E1000_READ_REG(hw, REGISTER) is 
far more readable as ER32(REGISTER), following the style of other 
drivers.  Furthermore, the "E1000_" prefix, in addition to being overly 
redundant (used in each register read/write), it is also incorrect, 
because this is not E1000...

* in general, rename everything with "e1000_" prefix.  this will 
eliminate plenty of human confusion in the long run.

* API:   unless you have chips in the lab that will require an API hook, 
don't create one.  For example, a direct call to 
e1000_acquire_nvm_82575() should replace all ->acquire_nvm() hooks.... 
if there are no chips in pipeline GUARANTEED to have a different 
->acquire_nvm() feature.

In general, I try to communicate that I am not opposed to these hooks, 
you merely need to make sure they are needed in _each_ case.  Otherwise 
engineers WILL fall into the habit of writing bloated code simply 
because that's what their chosen driver framework has always done.

	Jeff