From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiner Kallweit Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] net: phy: replace PHY_HAS_INTERRUPT with a check for config_intr and ack_interrupt Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 21:22:55 +0100 Message-ID: <44b503b8-9f2a-50ac-c4c9-d25258d98ef5@gmail.com> References: <203c4d9e-f39a-7a08-46c3-4ee6e61f181e@gmail.com> <20181109201307.GV5259@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Florian Fainelli , David Miller , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "maintainer:BROADCOM BCM63XX ARM ARCHITECTURE" , Richard Cochran , Carlo Caione , Kevin Hilman , open list , "moderated list:BROADCOM BCM63XX ARM ARCHITECTURE" , "open list:ARM/Amlogic Meson SoC support" To: Andrew Lunn Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181109201307.GV5259@lunn.ch> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 09.11.2018 21:13, Andrew Lunn wrote: > Hi Heiner > >> +static bool phy_drv_supports_irq(struct phy_driver *phydrv) >> +{ >> + return phydrv->config_intr || phydrv->ack_interrupt; >> +} > > Should this be && not || ? I thought both needed to be provided for > interrupts to work. > > Andrew > I've seen at least one driver which configures interrupts in config_init and doesn't define a config_intr callback (ack_interrupt callback is there) Intention of this check is not to ensure that the driver defines everything to make interrupts work. All it states: If at least one of the irq-related callbacks is defined, then we interpret this as indicator that the PHY supports interrupts. Heiner