Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: phy_link_topology: Handle NULL topologies

From: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>
To: Antoine Tenart <atenart@kernel.org>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com,
	"Andrew Lunn" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"Russell King" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	"Herve Codina" <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
	"Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	"Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
	"Vladimir Oltean" <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
	"Köry Maincent" <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>,
	"Jesse Brandeburg" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	"Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>,
	"Piergiorgio Beruto" <piergiorgio.beruto@gmail.com>,
	"Oleksij Rempel" <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>,
	"Nicolò Veronese" <nicveronese@gmail.com>,
	"Simon Horman" <horms@kernel.org>,
	mwojtas@chromium.org, "Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: phy_link_topology: Handle NULL topologies
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 15:16:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240412151648.653d41be@device-28.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <171292699033.4917.4025686054785818967@kwain>

Hi Antoine,

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 15:03:10 +0200
Antoine Tenart <atenart@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi Maxime,
> 
> Quoting Maxime Chevallier (2024-04-12 12:46:14)
> > 
> > This patch fixes a commit that is in net-next, hence the net-next tag and the
> > lack of "Fixes" tag.  
> 
> You can use Fixes: on net-next, that still helps to identify which
> commit is being fixed (eg. for reviews, while looking at the history,
> etc).

Won't the tag become invalid when the commit gets merged into an -rc
release then ?

> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_link_topology.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_link_topology.c
> > index 985941c5c558..0f3973f07fac 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_link_topology.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_link_topology.c
> > @@ -42,6 +42,9 @@ int phy_link_topo_add_phy(struct phy_link_topology *topo,
> >         struct phy_device_node *pdn;
> >         int ret;
> >  
> > +       if (!topo)
> > +               return 0;
> > +  
> 
> With that phy_sfp_connect_phy does not need to check the topo validity
> before calling phy_link_topo_add_phy. The other way around is fine too.
> 
> > @@ -93,7 +96,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_link_topo_add_phy);
> >  void phy_link_topo_del_phy(struct phy_link_topology *topo,
> >                            struct phy_device *phy)
> >  {
> > -       struct phy_device_node *pdn = xa_erase(&topo->phys, phy->phyindex);
> > +       struct phy_device_node *pdn;
> > +
> > +       if (!topo)
> > +               return;
> > +
> > +       pdn = xa_erase(&topo->phys, phy->phyindex);  
> 
> Same here with phy_sfp_disconnect_phy.

Ah right, well spotted, thanks !

Maxime

> 
> Thanks!
> Antoine

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel