[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0810071725300.4731@k.domain.actdsltmp>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 17:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...escale.com>
To: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 5/5] [NET] dsa: add support for the Marvell 88E6060
switch chip
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> +
> +static int reg_read(struct dsa_switch *ds, int addr, int reg)
> +{
> + return mdiobus_read(ds->master_mii_bus, addr, reg);
> +}
Instead of all the code to add the mdio buses to the device tree and exporting
mdiobus_read(), could you have just added the switch chip as a "phy" on the
mdio bus? Then used phy_read/write() on it? I know it's not a phy, but you
don't need to use the phy state machine and so on.
Freescale gianfar MACs configure the serdes for SGMII using a virtual "TBI"
device on the MDIO bus. Supposedly Andy has patch that adds them as devices
on the MDIO bus, isn't of the gianfar specific MDIO back-door they currently
use.
> +#define REG_READ(addr, reg) \
> + ({ \
> + int __ret; \
> + \
> + __ret = reg_read(ds, addr, reg); \
> + if (__ret < 0) \
> + return __ret; \
> + __ret; \
> + })
Macro with a hidden use of a local ('ds') and a hidden return? The former is
discouraged (but can sure save a lot of typing) but the latter seems like it's
just begging to cause a missing unlock or free on an error path.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists