[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f59e4f9b-e3a3-44b6-bcd9-0f74edecdc3e@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 17:25:59 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: "Radu Nicolae Pirea (OSS)" <radu-nicolae.pirea@....nxp.com>
Cc: hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] net: phy: introduce phy_reg_field interface
> I am trying to protect the __phy_read_mmd and __phy_read calls, not the
> reg_field->mmd.
You are?
Then why not use phy_read_mmd() and phy_read()?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists