[PATCH] net: stmicro: fix LS field mask in EEE configuration

This patch fixes the LS mask when setting EEE timer.
LS field is 10 bits long and not 11 as currently.

Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto <redacted>
Reported-By: Rayagond Kokatanur <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c
index 834f40f..202216c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_core.c

@@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ static void dwmac4_set_eee_pls(struct mac_device_info *hw, int link)
 static void dwmac4_set_eee_timer(struct mac_device_info *hw, int ls, int tw)
 {
 	void __iomem *ioaddr = hw->pcsr;
-	int value = ((tw & 0xffff)) | ((ls & 0x7ff) << 16);
+	int value = ((tw & 0xffff)) | ((ls & 0x3ff) << 16);
 
 	/* Program the timers in the LPI timer control register:
 	 * LS: minimum time (ms) for which the link

-- 
2.9.3

From: Joao Pinto <redacted>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:00:26 +0000

This patch fixes the LS mask when setting EEE timer.
LS field is 10 bits long and not 11 as currently.

Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto <redacted>
Reported-By: Rayagond Kokatanur <redacted>

Please indicate the appropriate target tree of your patch in the
subject line just like all other developers on this list do, don't
make me guess.

This time I figured out that this is meant for the net-next tree,
but I will not guess next time, I will just reject your patch
instead.

Thanks.

Acked-by:Rayagond Kokatanur [off-list ref]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Joao Pinto [off-list ref] wrote:

-- 
wwr
Rayagond

Hi David,

Às 9:49 PM de 1/22/2017, David Miller escreveu:

From: Joao Pinto <redacted>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:00:26 +0000

quoted

This patch fixes the LS mask when setting EEE timer.
LS field is 10 bits long and not 11 as currently.

Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto <redacted>
Reported-By: Rayagond Kokatanur <redacted>

Please indicate the appropriate target tree of your patch in the
subject line just like all other developers on this list do, don't
make me guess.

Sorry, I will follow that rule also of course.

This time I figured out that this is meant for the net-next tree,
but I will not guess next time, I will just reject your patch
instead.

Thanks.

Thanks.
Joao