[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y9qhLbZ/kf2/buln@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 18:28:13 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Arun.Ramadoss@...rochip.com, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 06/23] net: phy: c22: migrate to
genphy_c45_write_eee_adv()
> + /* This is optional functionality. If not supported, we may get an error
> + * which should be ignored.
> + */
> + genphy_c45_read_eee_abilities(phydev);
Humm, philosophic discussion. Would it be better for
genphy_c45_read_eee_abilities() to silently ignore the error? Errors
like -ETIMEDOUT should probably be returned, but -EOPNOTSUPP should be
ignored.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists