netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] mdio: mux: Enhanced MDIO mux framework for integrated multiplexers

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 6 Jun 2016 11:33:50 -0700
From:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:	Pramod Kumar <pramod.kumar@...adcom.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] mdio: mux: Enhanced MDIO mux framework for
 integrated multiplexers

On 06/06/2016 05:41 AM, Pramod Kumar wrote:
> An integrated multiplexer uses same address space for
> "muxed bus selection" and "generation of mdio transaction"
> hence its good to register parent bus from mux driver.
> 
> Hence added a mechanism where mux driver could register a
> parent bus and pass it down to framework via mdio_mux_init api.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pramod Kumar <pramod.kumar@...adcom.com>

Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>


> diff --git a/include/linux/mdio-mux.h b/include/linux/mdio-mux.h
> index a243dbb..61f5b21 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mdio-mux.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mdio-mux.h
> @@ -10,11 +10,13 @@
>  #ifndef __LINUX_MDIO_MUX_H
>  #define __LINUX_MDIO_MUX_H
>  #include <linux/device.h>
> +#include <linux/phy.h>

You could have added just a forward declaration, this is a pointer to
the structure so you don't need the compiler to have full knowledge of
the storage type. Not a biggie.
-- 
Florian