[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <edd6806e-555e-3713-514d-6d21198cc609@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:06:25 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] net: phy: reset the PHY even if probe() is not
implemented
On 6/26/2020 8:53 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>
> Currently we only call phy_device_reset() if the PHY driver implements
> the probe() callback. This is not mandatory and many drivers (e.g.
> realtek) don't need probe() for most devices but still can have reset
> GPIOs defined. There's no reason to depend on the presence of probe()
> here so pull the reset code out of the if clause.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
OK we can always add support for letting PHY drivers manage their own
reset line(s) during probe in a later changeset.
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists