[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5303A10A.3060106@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 21:06:02 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of_mdio: fix phy interrupt passing
Hello.
On 02/18/2014 08:02 PM, 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];
>> }
> Is this actually a valid thing to do? I think the only time mdio->irq[]
> is non-zero is when it is set to PHY_POLL. Is it valid to set phy->irq
> to PHY_POLL? I didn't think it was.
It is valid, AFAIK.
> g.
>> --
>> Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/
>> Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius
WBR, Sergei
--
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