* Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: phy: broadcom: add 1000Base-X support for BCM54616S
[not found] <20190801235839.290689-1-taoren@fb.com>
@ 2019-08-02 14:50 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-08-02 19:52 ` Tao Ren
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Lunn @ 2019-08-02 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tao Ren
Cc: Florian Fainelli, Heiner Kallweit, David S . Miller,
Arun Parameswaran, Justin Chen, Vladimir Oltean, netdev,
linux-kernel, openbmc
> +static int bcm54616s_read_status(struct phy_device *phydev)
> +{
> + int err;
> +
> + err = genphy_read_status(phydev);
> +
> + /* 1000Base-X register set doesn't provide speed fields: the
> + * link speed is always 1000 Mb/s as long as link is up.
> + */
> + if (phydev->dev_flags & PHY_BCM_FLAGS_MODE_1000BX &&
> + phydev->link)
> + phydev->speed = SPEED_1000;
> +
> + return err;
> +}
This function is equivalent to bcm5482_read_status(). You should use
it, rather than add a new function.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: phy: broadcom: add 1000Base-X support for BCM54616S
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH net-next v2] net: phy: broadcom: add 1000Base-X support for BCM54616S Andrew Lunn
@ 2019-08-02 19:52 ` Tao Ren
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tao Ren @ 2019-08-02 19:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn
Cc: Florian Fainelli, Heiner Kallweit, David S . Miller,
Arun Parameswaran, Justin Chen, Vladimir Oltean,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org
On 8/2/19 7:50 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> +static int bcm54616s_read_status(struct phy_device *phydev)
>> +{
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + err = genphy_read_status(phydev);
>> +
>> + /* 1000Base-X register set doesn't provide speed fields: the
>> + * link speed is always 1000 Mb/s as long as link is up.
>> + */
>> + if (phydev->dev_flags & PHY_BCM_FLAGS_MODE_1000BX &&
>> + phydev->link)
>> + phydev->speed = SPEED_1000;
>> +
>> + return err;
>> +}
>
> This function is equivalent to bcm5482_read_status(). You should use
> it, rather than add a new function.
Thank you for pointing it out. Will fix the code.
BTW, should I update the patch subject to something more descriptive (such as "net: phy: broadcom: fix BCM54616S read_status in 1000X mode")? Or I should use the same title to avoid confusion?
Thanks,
Tao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-08-02 19:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20190801235839.290689-1-taoren@fb.com>
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH net-next v2] net: phy: broadcom: add 1000Base-X support for BCM54616S Andrew Lunn
2019-08-02 19:52 ` Tao Ren
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).