Re: [RFC net-next 0/5] net: phy: add support for shared interrupts

[Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 07:09:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 07:17:05PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > - Every PHY driver gains a .handle_interrupt() implementation that, for
> > >   the most part, would look like below:
> > > 
> > > 	irq_status = phy_read(phydev, INTR_STATUS);
> > > 	if (irq_status < 0) {
> > > 		phy_error(phydev);
> > > 		return IRQ_NONE;
> > > 	}
> > > 
> > > 	if (irq_status == 0)
> > > 		return IRQ_NONE;
> > > 
> > > 	phy_trigger_machine(phydev);
> > > 
> > > 	return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > 
> > Hi Ioana
> > 
> > It looks like phy_trigger_machine(phydev) could be left in the core,
> > phy_interrupt(). It just needs to look at the return code, IRQ_HANDLED
> > means trigger the state machine.
> 
> Is this appropriate for things such as the existing user of
> handle_interrupt - vsc8584_handle_interrupt() ?

Ah, yes, you are likely to get a lot more ptp interrupts than link
up/down interrupts, and there is no point running the phy state
machine after each ptp interrupt. So Ioana's structure is better.

And now that phy_trigger_machine is exported, that driver can swap
from phy_mac_interrupt() to phy_trigger_machine().

	Andrew