Re: [PATCH net-next v1] lan78xx: lan7801 MAC support with lan8841
From: <Rengarajan.S@microchip.com>
Date: 2024-06-20 05:34:39
Also in:
linux-usb, lkml
Hi Jakub, Apologies for the delay in reply. Thanks for reviewing the patch and please find my comments inline. On Wed, 2024-06-12 at 18:33 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:12:33 +0530 Rengarajan S wrote:quoted
/* define external phy id */ #define PHY_LAN8835 (0x0007C130) +#define PHY_LAN8841 (0x00221650)For whatever reason the existing code uses a tab between define and its name, so let's stick to that?
Sure. Will address the change in the next patch revision.
quoted
#define PHY_KSZ9031RNX (0x00221620) /* use ethtool to change the level for any given device */@@ -2327,6 +2328,13 @@ static struct phy_device*lan7801_phy_init(struct lan78xx_net *dev) netdev_err(dev->net, "Failed to register fixup for PHY_LAN8835\n"); return NULL; } + /* external PHY fixup for LAN8841 */ + ret = phy_register_fixup_for_uid(PHY_LAN8841, 0xfffffff0, + lan8835_fixup); + if (ret < 0) { + netdev_err(dev->net, "Failed to register fixup for PHY_LAN8841\n");Don't you have to unregister the previous fixup on the error path here? In fact the existing error path for PHY_LAN8835 is missing an unregsiter for PHY_KSZ9031RNX.
There is a seperate register and unregister done for PHY_LAN8835 and PHY_KSZ9031RNX. Also, if the ret < 0 the fixup is not registered and there is no need to unregister it further. Can you please elaborate on what is missing in case of unregistering PHY_KSZ9031RNX.
Could you please send a separate fix for that with a Fixes tag?quoted
+ return NULL; + }