[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y467z9sr.fsf@ketchup.mtl.sfl>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 18:26:44 -0400
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next v2 11/12] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add an SMI ops structure
Hi Andrew,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> writes:
>> +struct mv88e6xxx_smi_ops {
>> + int (*read)(struct mii_bus *bus, int sw_addr,
>> + int addr, int reg, u16 *val);
>> + int (*write)(struct mii_bus *bus, int sw_addr,
>> + int addr, int reg, u16 val);
>> +};
>> +
>
> I think this API would be better if it used ps, not bus and sw_addr.
>
> The only problem is the very first read to get the switch ID. I would
> add one more layer in between, so that you can call the lowest level
> functions without having a ps structure.
That's why I keep it simple for the moment.
The low-level API using ps is now _mv88e6xxx_reg_{read,write}. I can
rename them to mv88e6xxx_smi_{read,write} in v3 or later.
Thanks,
Vivien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists