[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7dbf30ef-4908-4600-8898-cb812024392b@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 22:41:38 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
tmgross@...ch.edu, miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com,
benno.lossin@...ton.me, aliceryhl@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/6] rust: net::phy unified
genphy_read_status function for C22 and C45 registers
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 05:30:09AM +0000, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 03:19:51 +0200
> Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>
> >> +///
> >> +/// // Checks the link status and updates current link state via C22.
> >> +/// dev.genphy_read_status::<phy::C22>();
> >> +/// // Checks the link status and updates current link state via C45.
> >> +/// dev.genphy_read_status::<phy::C45>();
> >
> > Again, the word `via` is wrong here. You are looking at the link state
> > as reported by registers in the C22 namespace, or the C45 namespace.
>
> Yeah, how about the followings?
>
> /// // Checks the link status as reported by registers in the C22 namespace
> /// // and updates current link state.
> /// dev.genphy_read_status::<phy::C22>();
> /// // Checks the link status as reported by registers in the C45 namespace
> /// // and updates current link state.
> /// dev.genphy_read_status::<phy::C45>();
Yes, that is good.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists