[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53032A97.8050201@codethink.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 09:40:39 +0000
From: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...ts.codethink.co.uk, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of_mdio: fix phy interrupt passing
On 18/02/14 09:30, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 16:29:40 +0000, Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk> wrote:
>> The of_mdiobus_register_phy() is not setting phy->irq this causing
>> some drivers to incorrectly assume that the PHY does not have an
>> IRQ associated with it or install an interrupt handler for the
>> PHY.
>>
>> Simplify the code setting irq and set the phy->irq at the same
>> time so that the case if mdio->irq is not NULL is easier to read.
>>
>> This fixes the issue:
>> net eth0: attached PHY 1 (IRQ -1) to driver Micrel KSZ8041RNLI
>>
>> to the correct:
>> net eth0: attached PHY 1 (IRQ 416) to driver Micrel KSZ8041RNLI
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
>> ---
>> drivers/of/of_mdio.c | 12 ++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_mdio.c b/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
>> index 875b7b6..7b3e7b0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
>> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static int of_mdiobus_register_phy(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *chi
>> {
>> struct phy_device *phy;
>> bool is_c45;
>> - int rc, prev_irq;
>> + int rc;
>> u32 max_speed = 0;
>>
>> is_c45 = of_device_is_compatible(child,
>> @@ -55,11 +55,11 @@ static int of_mdiobus_register_phy(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *chi
>> return 1;
>>
>> if (mdio->irq) {
>> - prev_irq = mdio->irq[addr];
>> - mdio->irq[addr] =
>> - irq_of_parse_and_map(child, 0);
>> - if (!mdio->irq[addr])
>> - mdio->irq[addr] = prev_irq;
>
> I cannot for the life for me remeber why the code was structured that
> way. Your change is better.
>
>> + rc = irq_of_parse_and_map(child, 0);
>> + if (rc > 0) {
>> + mdio->irq[addr] = rc;
>> + phy->irq = rc;
>> + }
>> }
>
> The outer if is merely protecting against no irq array being allocated
> for the bus. Would not the following be better:
>
> rc = irq_of_parse_and_map(child, 0);
> if (rc > 0) {
> phy->irq = rc;
> if (mdio->irq)
> mdio->irq[addr] = rc;
> }
Thanks, that makes sense, although we've both failed to work
out if mdio->irq is set, and rc <= 0 case, so:
rc = irq_of_parse_and_map(child, 0);
if (rc > 0) {
phy->irq = rc;
if (mdio->irq)
mdio->irq[addr] = rc;
} else {
if (mdio->irq)
phy->irq = mdio->irq[addr];
}
I think that covers all cases. This does rely on mdio->irq
being initialised to PHY_POLL if allocated.
Once this is in, it may be easier then to not allocate
mdio->irq for the OF case by default unless the driver
registering the PHY knows it has the interrupt number(s)
for the PHY already.
--
Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/
Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists