From: jon.mason@broadcom.com (Jon Mason)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 5/7] net: ethernet: bgmac: device tree phy enablement
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:45:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161103164540.GA24723@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35b16640-8600-8c48-2f04-886dc925229d@milecki.pl>
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Rafal Milecki wrote:
> On 11/02/2016 06:08 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> >Change the bgmac driver to allow for phy's defined by the device tree
>
> This is a late review, I know, sorry... :(
>
>
> >+static int bcma_phy_direct_connect(struct bgmac *bgmac)
> >+{
> >+ struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> >+ .link = 1,
> >+ .speed = SPEED_1000,
> >+ .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> >+ };
> >+ struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ phy_dev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL, &fphy_status, -1, NULL);
> >+ if (!phy_dev || IS_ERR(phy_dev)) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Failed to register fixed PHY device\n");
> >+ return -ENODEV;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ err = phy_connect_direct(bgmac->net_dev, phy_dev, bgmac_adjust_link,
> >+ PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII);
> >+ if (err) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Connecting PHY failed\n");
> >+ return err;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ return err;
> >+}
>
> This bcma specific function looks exactly the same as...
>
>
> >+static int platform_phy_direct_connect(struct bgmac *bgmac)
> >+{
> >+ struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> >+ .link = 1,
> >+ .speed = SPEED_1000,
> >+ .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> >+ };
> >+ struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ phy_dev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL, &fphy_status, -1, NULL);
> >+ if (!phy_dev || IS_ERR(phy_dev)) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Failed to register fixed PHY device\n");
> >+ return -ENODEV;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ err = phy_connect_direct(bgmac->net_dev, phy_dev, bgmac_adjust_link,
> >+ PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII);
> >+ if (err) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Connecting PHY failed\n");
> >+ return err;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ return err;
> >+}
>
> This one.
>
> Would that make sense to keep bgmac_phy_connect_direct and just use it in
> bcma/platform code?
Yes, I was having the same internal debate. I hate the duplication of
code, but I really wanted to keep the PHY logic out of the bgmac.c
file. Do you think it is acceptable to make this an inline function
in bgmac.h?
Thanks,
Jon
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jon Mason <jon.mason-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
To: rafal-g1n6cQUeyibVItvQsEIGlw@public.gmane.org
Cc: David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Florian Fainelli
<f.fainelli-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org,
netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] net: ethernet: bgmac: device tree phy enablement
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:45:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161103164540.GA24723@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35b16640-8600-8c48-2f04-886dc925229d-g1n6cQUeyibVItvQsEIGlw@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Rafal Milecki wrote:
> On 11/02/2016 06:08 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> >Change the bgmac driver to allow for phy's defined by the device tree
>
> This is a late review, I know, sorry... :(
>
>
> >+static int bcma_phy_direct_connect(struct bgmac *bgmac)
> >+{
> >+ struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> >+ .link = 1,
> >+ .speed = SPEED_1000,
> >+ .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> >+ };
> >+ struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ phy_dev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL, &fphy_status, -1, NULL);
> >+ if (!phy_dev || IS_ERR(phy_dev)) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Failed to register fixed PHY device\n");
> >+ return -ENODEV;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ err = phy_connect_direct(bgmac->net_dev, phy_dev, bgmac_adjust_link,
> >+ PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII);
> >+ if (err) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Connecting PHY failed\n");
> >+ return err;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ return err;
> >+}
>
> This bcma specific function looks exactly the same as...
>
>
> >+static int platform_phy_direct_connect(struct bgmac *bgmac)
> >+{
> >+ struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> >+ .link = 1,
> >+ .speed = SPEED_1000,
> >+ .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> >+ };
> >+ struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ phy_dev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL, &fphy_status, -1, NULL);
> >+ if (!phy_dev || IS_ERR(phy_dev)) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Failed to register fixed PHY device\n");
> >+ return -ENODEV;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ err = phy_connect_direct(bgmac->net_dev, phy_dev, bgmac_adjust_link,
> >+ PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII);
> >+ if (err) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Connecting PHY failed\n");
> >+ return err;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ return err;
> >+}
>
> This one.
>
> Would that make sense to keep bgmac_phy_connect_direct and just use it in
> bcma/platform code?
Yes, I was having the same internal debate. I hate the duplication of
code, but I really wanted to keep the PHY logic out of the bgmac.c
file. Do you think it is acceptable to make this an inline function
in bgmac.h?
Thanks,
Jon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jon Mason <jon.mason@broadcom.com>
To: rafal@milecki.pl
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] net: ethernet: bgmac: device tree phy enablement
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:45:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161103164540.GA24723@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35b16640-8600-8c48-2f04-886dc925229d@milecki.pl>
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Rafal Milecki wrote:
> On 11/02/2016 06:08 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> >Change the bgmac driver to allow for phy's defined by the device tree
>
> This is a late review, I know, sorry... :(
>
>
> >+static int bcma_phy_direct_connect(struct bgmac *bgmac)
> >+{
> >+ struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> >+ .link = 1,
> >+ .speed = SPEED_1000,
> >+ .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> >+ };
> >+ struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ phy_dev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL, &fphy_status, -1, NULL);
> >+ if (!phy_dev || IS_ERR(phy_dev)) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Failed to register fixed PHY device\n");
> >+ return -ENODEV;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ err = phy_connect_direct(bgmac->net_dev, phy_dev, bgmac_adjust_link,
> >+ PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII);
> >+ if (err) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Connecting PHY failed\n");
> >+ return err;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ return err;
> >+}
>
> This bcma specific function looks exactly the same as...
>
>
> >+static int platform_phy_direct_connect(struct bgmac *bgmac)
> >+{
> >+ struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> >+ .link = 1,
> >+ .speed = SPEED_1000,
> >+ .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> >+ };
> >+ struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ phy_dev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL, &fphy_status, -1, NULL);
> >+ if (!phy_dev || IS_ERR(phy_dev)) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Failed to register fixed PHY device\n");
> >+ return -ENODEV;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ err = phy_connect_direct(bgmac->net_dev, phy_dev, bgmac_adjust_link,
> >+ PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII);
> >+ if (err) {
> >+ dev_err(bgmac->dev, "Connecting PHY failed\n");
> >+ return err;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ return err;
> >+}
>
> This one.
>
> Would that make sense to keep bgmac_phy_connect_direct and just use it in
> bcma/platform code?
Yes, I was having the same internal debate. I hate the duplication of
code, but I really wanted to keep the PHY logic out of the bgmac.c
file. Do you think it is acceptable to make this an inline function
in bgmac.h?
Thanks,
Jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-03 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-02 17:08 [PATCH v5 0/7] add NS2 support to bgmac Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] net: phy: broadcom: add bcm54xx_auxctl_read Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:11 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:11 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] Documentation: devicetree: add PHY lane swap binding Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:11 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:11 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:39 ` Andrew Lunn
2016-11-02 17:39 ` Andrew Lunn
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] net: phy: broadcom: Add BCM54810 PHY entry Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:12 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:12 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 18:37 ` Andrew Lunn
2016-11-02 18:37 ` Andrew Lunn
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] Documentation: devicetree: net: add NS2 bindings to amac Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:13 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:13 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:18 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-11-02 17:18 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-11-02 17:24 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:24 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 19:52 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-11-02 19:52 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] net: ethernet: bgmac: device tree phy enablement Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:16 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:16 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:16 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-03 8:31 ` Rafal Milecki
2016-11-03 8:31 ` Rafal Milecki
2016-11-03 8:31 ` Rafal Milecki
2016-11-03 16:45 ` Jon Mason [this message]
2016-11-03 16:45 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-03 16:45 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] net: ethernet: bgmac: add NS2 support Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:17 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:17 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:08 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] arm64: dts: NS2: add AMAC ethernet support Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:08 ` Jon Mason
2016-11-02 17:17 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-02 17:17 ` Florian Fainelli
2016-11-03 20:02 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] add NS2 support to bgmac David Miller
2016-11-03 20:02 ` David Miller
2016-11-03 20:02 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161103164540.GA24723@broadcom.com \
--to=jon.mason@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.