From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Fix phy_modify() semantic difference fallout
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 14:50:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180109145010.GL17719@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180109144813.GC724@lunn.ch>
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:48:13PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > I took a quick look at the uses of phy_modify(). I don't see any uses
> > > of the return code other than as an error indicator. So having it
> > > return 0 on success seems like a better fix.
> >
> > I'd like to avoid that, because I don't want to have yet another
> > accessor that needs to be used for advertisment modification (where
> > we need to know if we changed any bits.)
> >
> > That's why this accessor returns the old value.
>
> Hi Russell
>
> where exactly is this use case? I've not found it yet.
>
> I can understand your argument. But how long it is going to take us to
> find all the breakage because the return value has changed meaning?
>
> The trade off is adding yet another accessor vs debugging and fixing
> the repercussions.
>
> I think i prefer not breaking existing code.
Please introduce a new accessor then.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-09 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-09 11:11 [PATCH] net: phy: Fix phy_modify() semantic difference fallout Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-09 14:10 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-01-09 14:22 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-09 14:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-09 14:48 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-01-09 14:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2018-01-09 18:25 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-09 18:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-09 18:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-09 14:35 ` Niklas Cassel
2018-01-11 15:48 ` David Miller
2018-01-11 15:53 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-11 15:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-11 16:00 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-11 16:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-11 17:04 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-01-11 20:28 ` Florian Fainelli
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=20180109145010.GL17719@n2100.armlinux.org.uk \
--to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).