[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250306095710.GR3666230@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 09:57:10 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: stmmac: simplify phylink_suspend() and
phylink_resume() calls
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 11:21:27AM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> Currently, the calls to phylink's suspend and resume functions are
> inside overly complex tests, and boil down to:
>
> if (device_may_wakeup(priv->device) && priv->plat->pmt) {
> call phylink
> } else {
> call phylink and
> if (device_may_wakeup(priv->device))
> do something else
> }
>
> This results in phylink always being called, possibly with differing
> arguments for phylink_suspend().
>
> Simplify this code, noting that each site is slightly different due to
> the order in which phylink is called and the "something else".
>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists