[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160329162825.GC4690@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 18:28:25 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
Cc: Patrick Uiterwijk <patrick@...terwijk.org>, linux@...ck-us.net,
davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dennis@...il.us,
pbrobinson@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Clear the PDOWN bit
on setup
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:23:06PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> Two comments below.
>
> Patrick Uiterwijk <patrick@...terwijk.org> writes:
>
> > +static int mv88e6xxx_power_on_serdes(struct dsa_switch *ds)
>
> Since this function assumes the SMI lock is already held, its name
> should be prefixed with _ by convention (_mv88e6xxx_power_on_serdes).
We decided to drop at, since nearly everything would end up with a _
prefix. The assert_smi_lock() should find any missing locks, and
lockdep/deadlocks will make it clear when the lock is taken twice.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists