[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240828134413.3da6f336@device-28.home>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:44:13 +0200
From: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric
Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Christophe
Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, Florian Fainelli
<f.fainelli@...il.com>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com, Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] net: ethernet: fs_enet: phylink conversion
Hi Russell,
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 11:38:31 +0100
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 11:51:02AM +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> > +static int fs_eth_ioctl(struct net_device *dev, struct ifreq *ifr, int cmd)
> > +{
> > + struct fs_enet_private *fep = netdev_priv(dev);
> > +
> > + if (!netif_running(dev))
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Why do you need this check?
>
I included it as the original ioctl was phy_do_ioctl_running(), which
includes that check.
Is this check irrelevant with phylink ? I could only find macb and
xilinx_axienet that do the same check in their ioctl.
I can't tell you why that check is there in the first place in that
driver, a quick grep search leads back from a major driver rework in
2011, at which point the check was already there...
Regards,
Maxime
Powered by blists - more mailing lists