From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Giuseppe CAVALLARO Subject: Re: [net-next 1/4] phy: add the EEE support and the way to access to the MMD regs Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:39:45 +0100 Message-ID: <4F5A1631.9010006@st.com> References: <4F4E4D4B.3040909@st.com> <1331022494-12891-1-git-send-email-peppe.cavallaro@st.com> <1331022494-12891-2-git-send-email-peppe.cavallaro@st.com> <1331052913.2333.16.camel@bwh-desktop> <1331053557.2333.19.camel@bwh-desktop> <4F58C821.3040104@st.com> <1331231373.2481.7.camel@bwh-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, rayagond@vayavyalabs.com To: Ben Hutchings Return-path: Received: from eu1sys200aog110.obsmtp.com ([207.126.144.129]:57877 "EHLO eu1sys200aog110.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756671Ab2CIOka (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:40:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1331231373.2481.7.camel@bwh-desktop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/8/2012 7:29 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 15:54 +0100, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote: >> Hello Ben >> >> thanks for your review and sorry for my delay. >> >> On 3/6/2012 6:05 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > [...] >>>>> +static inline void mmd_phy_cl45(struct mii_bus *bus, int prtad, int devad, >>>>> + int addr) >>>> [...] >>>>> +/** >>>>> + * read_phy_mmd - reads data from the MMC register (clause 22 to access to >>>>> + * clause 45) >>>> [...] >>>>> +/** >>>>> + * write_phy_mmd - writes data to the MMC register (clause 22 to access to >>>>> + * clause 45) >>>> >>>> These names need to be changed as phylib also supports (or is intended >>>> to support) real clause 45 PHYs. >> >> >> What do you suggest? Do I have to rename these functions for example as? >> >> write_phy_mmd ----> phy_write_mmd_cl45 >> read_phy_mmd ----> phy_read_mmd_cl45 > > These are a means to access MMDs through the clause 22 MDIO protocol, so yes indeed :-) > it seems to me that the name should include '22' and not '45'. But > perhaps it would be more obvious to use the word 'indirect'. ok for phy_write/read_mmd_indirect > >> I've also another doubt. I put this code in phy_device.c. Is it correct? >> >> Maybe, it could be better have it in phy.c? What do you think? > [...] > > No idea, I don't have any involvement in phylib. ok. I'll keep the code in phy_device unless to have further feedback from other developers. peppe > > Ben. >