Hi Florian,
Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> writes:
> Just some general note on the way the driver seems to be going there
> seems to be a multiplication of new ops being introduced, and most of
> them seem to default to the mv88e6xxx (generic) ones. Should you do
> something like:
>
> if (!ops->foo)
> ops->foo = mv88e6xxx_foo
>
> Such that you reduce the possibility for a specific switch model to lack
> such an operation?
You are correct, ideally generic library functions (the one starting
with the mv88e6xxx_ prefix) should not be assigned to ops.
The ops are const though. I'll come up with something maintainable.
Thanks!
Vivien
