netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/3] net: phy: Add helper for getting tx amplitude gain

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250205052218.GC3831@debian>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 06:22:18 +0100
From: Dimitri Fedrau <dima.fedrau@...il.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: dimitri.fedrau@...bherr.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Andrew Davis <afd@...com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/3] net: phy: Add helper for getting tx
 amplitude gain

Am Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 05:54:53PM +0000 schrieb Russell King (Oracle):
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 02:09:16PM +0100, Dimitri Fedrau via B4 Relay wrote:
> >  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_MDIO)
> > -static int phy_get_int_delay_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> > +static int phy_get_u32_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> >  {
> >  	s32 int_delay;
> >  	int ret;
> > @@ -3108,7 +3108,7 @@ static int phy_get_int_delay_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> >  	return int_delay;
> 
> Hmm. You're changing the name of this function from "int" to "u32", yet
> it still returns "int".
>

I just wanted to reuse code for retrieving the u32, I found
phy_get_int_delay_property and renamed it. But the renaming from "int"
to "u32" is wrong as you outlined.

> What range of values are you expecting to be returned by this function?
> If it's the full range of u32 values, then that overlaps with the error
> range returned by device_property_read_u32().
>

Values are in percent, u8 would already be enough, so it wouldn't
overlap with the error range.

> I'm wondering whether it would be better to follow the example set by
> these device_* functions, and pass a pointer for the value to them, and
> just have the return value indicating success/failure.
>

I would prefer this, but this would mean changes in phy_get_internal_delay
if we don't want to duplicate code, as phy_get_internal_delay relies on
phy_get_int_delay_property and we change function parameters of
phy_get_int_delay_property as you described. I would switch from
static int phy_get_int_delay_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
to
static int phy_get_u32_property(struct device *dev, const char *name, u32 *val)

Do you agree ?

Best regards,
Dimitri Fedrau