On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 05:53:00PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:

+/// Corresponds to the kernel's `enum phy_state`.
+#[derive(PartialEq)]
+pub enum DeviceState {
+    /// PHY device and driver are not ready for anything.
+    Down,
+    /// PHY is ready to send and receive packets.
+    Ready,
+    /// PHY is up, but no polling or interrupts are done.
+    Halted,
+    /// PHY is up, but is in an error state.
+    Error,
+    /// PHY and attached device are ready to do work.
+    Up,
+    /// PHY is currently running.
+    Running,
+    /// PHY is up, but not currently plugged in.
+    NoLink,
+    /// PHY is performing a cable test.
+    CableTest,
+}

I still think these should come straight from the C code, and that
moving them to an enum makes sense to make this possible, but hey, it's
not my subsystem to maintain!  :)

+/// Wraps the kernel's `struct phy_device`.
+///
+/// # Invariants
+///
+/// `self.0` is always in a valid state.
+#[repr(transparent)]
+pub struct Device(Opaque<bindings::phy_device>);
+
+impl Device {
+    /// Creates a new [`Device`] instance from a raw pointer.
+    ///
+    /// # Safety
+    ///
+    /// For the duration of the lifetime 'a, the pointer must be valid for writing and nobody else
+    /// may read or write to the `phy_device` object.
+    pub unsafe fn from_raw<'a>(ptr: *mut bindings::phy_device) -> &'a mut Self {
+        unsafe { &mut *ptr.cast() }
+    }
+
+    /// Gets the id of the PHY.
+    pub fn id(&mut self) -> u32 {
+        let phydev = self.0.get();
+        // SAFETY: `phydev` is pointing to a valid object by the type invariant of `Self`.
+        unsafe { (*phydev).phy_id }
+    }

Naming question, why are you making this "id" instead of "phy_id"
like the C code has?  Same for many of these bindings.

+    /// Returns true if the link is up.
+    pub fn get_link(&mut self) -> bool {
+        const LINK_IS_UP: u32 = 1;
+        let phydev = self.0.get();
+        // SAFETY: `phydev` is pointing to a valid object by the type invariant of `Self`.
+        unsafe { (*phydev).link() == LINK_IS_UP }
+    }

"get_" normally means to grab a reference, if this isn't matching a C
call, why not just call it link_is_up or to match your other state
checks "is_link_up"?

but hey, I'm just bikeshedding at this point in time, if they maintainer
likes these as-is, keep them :)

thanks,

greg k-h