On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 09:48:55PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > Hi, > > On 5/23/20 1:36 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 04:30:50PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > Since we are already checking for *devs == 0 after > > > the loop terminates, we can add a mostly F's check > > > as well. With that change we can simplify the return/break > > > sequence inside the loop. > > > > > > Add a valid_phy_id() macro for this, since we will be using it > > > in a couple other places. > > > > I'm not sure you have the name of this correct, and your usage layer > > in your patch series is correct. > > Or the name is poor.. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.lin...@arm.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c | 15 +++++++-------- > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > > > index 245899b58a7d..7746c07b97fe 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > > > @@ -695,6 +695,11 @@ static int get_phy_c45_devs_in_pkg(struct mii_bus > > > *bus, int addr, int dev_addr, > > > return 0; > > > } > > > +static bool valid_phy_id(int val) > > > +{ > > > + return (val > 0 && ((val & 0x1fffffff) != 0x1fffffff)); > > > +} > > > + > > > /** > > > * get_phy_c45_ids - reads the specified addr for its 802.3-c45 IDs. > > > * @bus: the target MII bus > > > @@ -732,18 +737,12 @@ static int get_phy_c45_ids(struct mii_bus *bus, int > > > addr, u32 *phy_id, > > > phy_reg = get_phy_c45_devs_in_pkg(bus, addr, 0, > > > devs); > > > if (phy_reg < 0) > > > return -EIO; > > > - /* no device there, let's get out of here */ > > > - if ((*devs & 0x1fffffff) == 0x1fffffff) { > > > - *phy_id = 0xffffffff; > > > - return 0; > > > - } else { > > > - break; > > > - } > > > + break; > > > } > > > } > > > /* no reported devices */ > > > - if (*devs == 0) { > > > + if (!valid_phy_id(*devs)) { > > > > You are using this to validate the "devices in package" value, not the > > PHY ID value. So, IMHO this should be called "valid_devs_in_package()" > > or similar. > > Hmmm, its more "valid_phy_reg()" since it ends up being used to validate > both the devs in package as well as phy id.
I don't think that is a valid use of the code you've put in valid_phy_id(). -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC for 0.8m (est. 1762m) line in suburbia: sync at 13.1Mbps down 424kbps up