[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y86pItVLKwbRYX7e@lunn.ch>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 16:34:58 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc: Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Marek BehĂșn <kabel@...nel.org>,
Xu Liang <lxu@...linear.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: phy: add error checks in
mmd_phy_indirect() and export it
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 11:40:07PM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
> Add missing error checks in mmd_phy_indirect(). The error checks need to
> be disabled to retain the current behavior in phy_read_mmd() and
> phy_write_mmd(). Therefore, add a new parameter to enable the error
> checks. Add a thin wrapper __phy_mmd_indirect() which is then exported.
Do we need to retain the current behavior? Is there a good reason to
silently ignore errors? If there is, it would be good to state it here
in the commit message.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists