[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8555d3b6-8154-4a79-9828-352641ca0a58@lunn.ch>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 18:49:48 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Mohammed Anees <pvmohammedanees2003@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
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>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: Fix conditional handling of Wake-on-Lan
configuration in dsa_user_set_wol
On Sat, Oct 05, 2024 at 03:32:06AM +0530, Mohammed Anees wrote:
> The WOL configuration now checks if the DSA switch supports setting WOL
> before attempting to apply settings via phylink. This prevents
> unnecessary calls to phylink_ethtool_set_wol when WOL is not supported.
The commit message should say why a change is being made. Why should
phylink_ethtool_set_wol() not be called? Why is it unnecassary? What
if the PHY supports WoL, and does not need any help from DSA?
Andrew
---
pw-bot: cr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists