[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170321130912.GY21222@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:09:13 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/7] phylib MMD accessor cleanups
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 03:30:38PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Le 03/19/17 à 03:59, Russell King - ARM Linux a écrit :
> > This series of patches does exactly that - we merge the functionality
> > of the indirect accesses into the clause 45 accessors, and use these
> > exclusively to access MMD registers. Internally, the new clause
> > independent MMD accessors indirect via the PHY drivers read_mmd/write_mmd
> > methods if present, otherwise fall back to using clause 45 accesses if
> > the PHY is a clause 45 phy, or clause 22 indirect accesses if the PHY
> > is clause 22.
>
> LGTM:
>
> Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Thanks. When I posted this last time around (19th Jan) I mentioned
about marking the old _indirect() accessors with __deprecated - is
that still something we want to do?
I haven't tested this against net-next yet, so I don't know if there
are any new users of the indirect accessors - going down the deprecated
route would avoid breakage, but means having to submit a patch later to
actually remove them.
How would people want this handled?
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists