Re: [RFC PATCH v3 net-next 09/10] net: dsa: ocelot: felix: add support for VSC75XX control over SPI

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 12:14:54AM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix_vsc9959.c b/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix_vsc9959.c
index a84129d18007..d0b3f6be360f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix_vsc9959.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix_vsc9959.c

@@ -1046,7 +1046,7 @@ static int vsc9959_mdio_bus_alloc(struct ocelot *ocelot)
 	int rc;
 
 	felix->pcs = devm_kcalloc(dev, felix->info->num_ports,
-				  sizeof(struct lynx_pcs *),
+				  sizeof(struct phylink_pcs *),
 				  GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!felix->pcs) {
 		dev_err(dev, "failed to allocate array for PCS PHYs\n");

@@ -1095,8 +1095,8 @@ static int vsc9959_mdio_bus_alloc(struct ocelot *ocelot)
 
 	for (port = 0; port < felix->info->num_ports; port++) {
 		struct ocelot_port *ocelot_port = ocelot->ports[port];
+		struct phylink_pcs *phylink;
 		struct mdio_device *pcs;
-		struct lynx_pcs *lynx;

Normally, "phylink" is used to refer to the main phylink data
structure, so I'm not too thrilled to see it getting re-used for the
PCS. However, as you have a variable called "pcs" already, I suppose
you don't have much choice.

That said, it would be nice to have consistent naming through at
least a single file, and you do have "pcs" below to refer to this
same thing.

Maybe using plpcs or ppcs would suffice? Or maybe use the "long name"
of phylink_pcs ?

I noticed this as well. It seems to me like the mdio_device variable
name of pcs is misleading, and perhaps should be "mdio" and phylink_pcs
should be pcs, or any of the alternatives you suggested.

quoted

 
 		if (dsa_is_unused_port(felix->ds, port))
 			continue;

@@ -1108,13 +1108,13 @@ static int vsc9959_mdio_bus_alloc(struct ocelot *ocelot)
 		if (IS_ERR(pcs))
 			continue;
 
-		lynx = lynx_pcs_create(pcs);
+		phylink = lynx_pcs_create(pcs);
 		if (!lynx) {

I think you want to change this test.

Yes, I caught these shortly after submitting it. Fixed.