Messages in this thread | | | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> | Date | Tue, 9 Jan 2018 15:35:39 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Fix phy_modify() semantic difference fallout |
| |
Hi Russell,
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:10:08PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:11:21PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> > In case of success, the return values of (__)phy_write() and >> > (__)phy_modify() are not compatible: (__)phy_write() returns 0, while >> > (__)phy_modify() returns the old PHY register value. >> > >> > Apparently this change was catered for in drivers/net/phy/marvell.c, but >> > not in other source files. >> > >> > Hence genphy_restart_aneg() now returns 4416 instead zero, which is >> > considered an error: >> > >> > ravb e6800000.ethernet eth0: failed to connect PHY >> > IP-Config: Failed to open eth0 >> > IP-Config: No network devices available >> > >> > Fix this by converting positive values to zero in all callers of >> > phy_modify(). >> > >> > Fixes: fea23fb591cce995 ("net: phy: convert read-modify-write to phy_modify()") >> > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> >> > --- >> > Alternatively, __phy_modify() could be changed to follow __phy_write() >> > semantics? >> >> Hi Geert, Russell >> >> I took a quick look at the uses of phy_modify(). I don't see any uses >> of the return code other than as an error indicator. So having it >> return 0 on success seems like a better fix. > > I'd like to avoid that, because I don't want to have yet another > accessor that needs to be used for advertisment modification (where > we need to know if we changed any bits.) > > That's why this accessor returns the old value.
Can I consider that to be an Acked-by for my patch? ;-)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
| |