[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d5b8b7cc-703f-47ec-b8ef-b4f31f18fee2@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 15:02:23 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] net: phy: broadcom: use
genphy_c45_an_config_eee_aneg in bcm_config_lre_aneg
On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 09:24:18PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> bcm_config_lre_aneg() is the only user of genphy_config_eee_advert(),
> therefore use genphy_c45_an_config_eee_aneg() instead. The resulting
> functionality is equivalent, and bcm_config_lre_aneg() follows the
> structure of __genphy_config_aneg().
I think the commit message could be clearer. Just looking at
genphy_config_eee_advert() and genphy_c45_an_config_eee_aneg() it is
not clear they are equivalent. You need to dig into
genphy_c45_write_eee_adv() where phydev->eee_broken_modes comes in,
and they start to look similar.
It does however look like this will work, so:
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists