On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 03:37:55AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:

On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 06:17:52PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 14:36:30 +0100 Christian Marangi wrote:

quoted

+/**
+ * phy_package_write_mmd - Convenience function for writing a register
+ * on an MMD on a given PHY using the PHY package base addr, added of
+ * the addr_offset value.
+ * @phydev: The phy_device struct
+ * @addr_offset: The offset to be added to PHY package base_addr
+ * @devad: The MMD to read from
+ * @regnum: The register on the MMD to read
+ * @val: value to write to @regnum
+ *
+ * Same rules as for phy_write();
+ *
+ * NOTE: It's assumed that the entire PHY package is either C22 or C45.
+ */

quoted

+/*
+ * phy_package_write_mmd - Convenience function for writing a register
+ * on an MMD on a given PHY using the PHY package base addr, added of
+ * the addr_offset value.
+ */
+int phy_package_write_mmd(struct phy_device *phydev,
+			  unsigned int addr_offset, int devad,
+			  u32 regnum, u16 val);

Hm, I see there's some precedent here already for this duplicated
semi-kdoc. It seems a bit unusual. If I was looking for kdoc and 
found the header one I'd probably not look at the source file at all.

Andrew, WDYT?

I tend to agree. These functions should be documented once in kdoc,
and only once. I don't really care if its in the header, or the C
code, but not both.

Ok just to make sure, I should keep the kdoc in the .c and drop them in
.h ? (or should I move the more complete kdoc in .c to .h and remove
kdoc in .c?)

I followed the pattern for the other API but I get they are very old
code.

-- 
	Ansuel