netdev - Re: [patch net-next 05/11] net: hns: add uniform interface for phy connection

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <573916F8.50005@huawei.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 May 2016 08:40:24 +0800
From:	"Yankejian (Hackim Yim)" <yankejian@...wei.com>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Yisen Zhuang <Yisen.Zhuang@...wei.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<rjw@...ysocki.net>, <lenb@...nel.org>
CC:	<arnd@...db.de>, <andrew@...n.ch>, <geliangtang@....com>,
	<ivecera@...hat.com>, <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	<charles.chenxin@...wei.com>, <haifeng.wei@...wei.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 05/11] net: hns: add uniform interface for phy
 connection



On 2016/5/13 21:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-05-13 at 16:19 +0800, Yisen Zhuang wrote:
>> From: Kejian Yan <yankejian@...wei.com>
>>
>> As device_node is only used by OF case, HNS needs to treat the others
>> cases including ACPI. It needs to use uniform ways to handle both of
>> OF and ACPI. This patch chooses phy_device, and of_phy_connect and
>> of_phy_attach are only used by OF case. It needs to add uniform
>> interface
>> to handle that sequence by both OF and ACPI.
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/hisilicon/hns/hns_enet.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/hisilicon/hns/hns_enet.c
>> @@ -987,6 +987,41 @@ static void hns_nic_adjust_link(struct net_device
>> *ndev)
>>  	h->dev->ops->adjust_link(h, ndev->phydev->speed, ndev-
>>> phydev->duplex);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static
>> +struct phy_device *hns_nic_phy_attach(struct net_device *dev,
>> +				      struct phy_device *phy,
>> +				      u32 flags,
>> +				      phy_interface_t iface)
>> +{
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	if (!phy)
>> +		return NULL;
> No need to use defensive programming here.
>
>> +
>> +	ret = phy_attach_direct(dev, phy, flags, iface);
>> +
>> +	return ret ? NULL : phy;
> Shouldn't it return an error?
>
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +static
>> +struct phy_device *hns_nic_phy_connect(struct net_device *dev,
>> +				       struct phy_device *phy,
>> +				       void (*hndlr)(struct
>> net_device *),
>> +				       u32 flags,
>> +				       phy_interface_t iface)
>> +{
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	if (!phy)
>> +		return NULL;
>> +
>> +	phy->dev_flags = flags;
>> +
>> +	ret = phy_connect_direct(dev, phy, hndlr, iface);
>> +
>> +	return ret ? NULL : phy;
>> +}
>> +
> For now looks that above functions are redundant and you may call them
> directly in below code.

Hi Andy,
Thanks for you suggestions, it will be fixed in next submit

MBR,
Kejian

>>  /**
>>   *hns_nic_init_phy - init phy
>>   *@...v: net device
>> @@ -996,16 +1031,17 @@ static void hns_nic_adjust_link(struct
>> net_device *ndev)
>>  int hns_nic_init_phy(struct net_device *ndev, struct hnae_handle *h)
>>  {
>>  	struct hns_nic_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> -	struct phy_device *phy_dev = NULL;
>> +	struct phy_device *phy_dev = h->phy_dev;
>>  
>> -	if (!h->phy_node)
>> +	if (!h->phy_dev)
>>  		return 0;
>>  
>>  	if (h->phy_if != PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_XGMII)
>> -		phy_dev = of_phy_connect(ndev, h->phy_node,
>> -					 hns_nic_adjust_link, 0, h-
>>> phy_if);
>> +		phy_dev = hns_nic_phy_connect(ndev, phy_dev,
>> +					      hns_nic_adjust_link,
>> +					      0, h->phy_if);
>>  	else
>> -		phy_dev = of_phy_attach(ndev, h->phy_node, 0, h-
>>> phy_if);
>> +		phy_dev = hns_nic_phy_attach(ndev, phy_dev, 0, h-
>>> phy_if);
>