[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eabf052b-02a0-4440-b0f7-c831d9ebaa23@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 22:59:07 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 11/20] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: split out EXTTS
pin setup
> static const struct mv88e6xxx_cc_coeffs *
> mv88e6xxx_cc_coeff_get(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip)
> {
> @@ -352,27 +366,18 @@ static int mv88e6352_ptp_enable_extts(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
> return -EBUSY;
>
> mv88e6xxx_reg_lock(chip);
> + err = mv88e6352_ptp_pin_setup(chip, pin, PTP_PF_EXTTS, on);
>
> - if (on) {
> - func = MV88E6352_G2_SCRATCH_GPIO_PCTL_EVREQ;
> -
> - err = mv88e6352_set_gpio_func(chip, pin, func, true);
> - if (err)
> - goto out;
> -
> + if (!on) {
Inverting the if () makes this a little bit harder to review. But it
does remove a goto. I probably would of kept the code in the same
order. But:
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists