From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: Brad Mouring <brad.mouring@ni.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Move interrupt check from phy_check to phy_interrupt
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 17:29:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180308162905.GE5144@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180307225042.2205-1-brad.mouring@ni.com>
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 04:50:42PM -0600, Brad Mouring wrote:
> If multiple phys share the same interrupt (e.g. a multi-phy chip),
> the first device registered is the only one checked as phy_interrupt
> will always return IRQ_HANDLED if the first phydev is not halted.
> Move the interrupt check into phy_interrupt and, if it was not this
> phydev, return IRQ_NONE to allow other devices on this irq a chance
> to check if it was their interrupt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brad Mouring <brad.mouring@ni.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/phy/phy.c | 16 ++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> index e3e29c2b028b..ff1aa815568f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> @@ -632,6 +632,12 @@ static irqreturn_t phy_interrupt(int irq, void *phy_dat)
> if (PHY_HALTED == phydev->state)
> return IRQ_NONE; /* It can't be ours. */
>
> + if (phy_interrupt_is_valid(phydev)) {
Hi Brad
Is this check needed? Can phy_interrupt() be called for a PHY which
does not have an interrupt?
> + if (phydev->drv->did_interrupt &&
> + !phydev->drv->did_interrupt(phydev))
> + return IRQ_NONE;
> + }
> +
> phy_change(phydev);
>
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> @@ -725,16 +731,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(phy_stop_interrupts);
> */
> void phy_change(struct phy_device *phydev)
> {
> - if (phy_interrupt_is_valid(phydev)) {
> - if (phydev->drv->did_interrupt &&
> - !phydev->drv->did_interrupt(phydev))
> - return;
> -
> - if (phydev->state == PHY_HALTED)
> - if (phy_disable_interrupts(phydev))
> - goto phy_err;
> - }
> -
phy_change() can also be called via phy_mac_interrupt(). I wonder if
this change is going to break anything? Did you think about that?
Thanks
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-08 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-07 22:50 [PATCH] net: phy: Move interrupt check from phy_check to phy_interrupt Brad Mouring
2018-03-08 16:29 ` Andrew Lunn [this message]
2018-03-08 16:46 ` Brad Mouring
2018-03-08 19:41 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2018-03-08 19:57 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2018-03-08 20:16 ` Brad Mouring
2018-03-08 20:25 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2018-03-08 20:31 ` [PATCH] net: phy: Tell caller result of phy_change() Brad Mouring
2018-03-08 20:47 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-03-08 22:23 ` [PATCH net v3] " Brad Mouring
2018-03-12 14:34 ` 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=20180308162905.GE5144@lunn.ch \
--to=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=brad.mouring@ni.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox