netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: dwmac-rk: No need to check the return value of the phy_power

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: <aDne1Ybuvbk0AwG0@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 17:37:41 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: 李哲 <sensor1010@....com>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com,
	alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, jonas@...boo.se,
	david.wu@...k-chips.com, jan.petrous@....nxp.com,
	detlev.casanova@...labora.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dwmac-rk: No need to check the return value of the
 phy_power_on()

On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 09:20:17AM -0700, 李哲 wrote:
> phy_power_on() is a local scope one within the driver, since the return
> value of the phy_power_on() function is always 0, checking its return
> value is redundant.
> 
> Signed-off-by: 李哲 <sensor1010@....com>

Patch looks generally good, nice to see the reverse christmas tree
ordering of local variables resulting from this patch. However, the
subject line needs to be adjusted to meet netdev requirements. Please
see
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.1/networking/netdev-FAQ.html#q-how-do-i-indicate-which-tree-net-vs-net-next-my-patch-should-be-in
Please wait a minimum of one day before sending an updated version.

Reviewed-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>

Please can you also follow up with a patch to change the function name
from "phy_power_on()" as this may conflict with the PHY subsystems
"int phy_power_on(struct phy *phy);"

"rk_phy_power_set()" would probably be a good alternative name,
especially as when the 2nd argument is false, the function turns the
PHY off.

Thanks!

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!