Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 6/7] net: phylink: Introduce phylink_fwnode_phy_connect()

From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:43:30 +0000

On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 06:41:21PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 09:04:39PM +0530, Calvin Johnson wrote:
> > From: Calvin Johnson <[email-masked]>
> > 
> > Introduce phylink_fwnode_phy_connect API to connect the PHY using
> > fwnode.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Calvin Johnson <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> > 
> >  drivers/net/phy/phylink.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/linux/phylink.h   |  2 ++
> >  2 files changed, 66 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c b/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
> > index ee7a718662c6..f211f62283b5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
> > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/spinlock.h>
> >  #include <linux/timer.h>
> >  #include <linux/workqueue.h>
> > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> >  
> >  #include "sfp.h"
> >  #include "swphy.h"
> > @@ -817,6 +818,69 @@ int phylink_connect_phy(struct phylink *pl, struct phy_device *phy)
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phylink_connect_phy);
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * phylink_fwnode_phy_connect() - connect the PHY specified in the fwnode.
> > + * @pl: a pointer to a &struct phylink returned from phylink_create()
> > + * @dn: a pointer to a &struct device_node.
> > + * @flags: PHY-specific flags to communicate to the PHY device driver
> > + *
> > + * Connect the phy specified in the device node @dn to the phylink instance
> > + * specified by @pl. Actions specified in phylink_connect_phy() will be
> > + * performed.
> > + *
> > + * Returns 0 on success or a negative errno.
> > + */
> > +int phylink_fwnode_phy_connect(struct phylink *pl,
> > +			       struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> > +			       u32 flags)
> > +{
> > +	struct fwnode_handle *phy_node;
> > +	struct phy_device *phy_dev;
> > +	int ret;
> > +	int status;
> > +	struct fwnode_reference_args args;
> > +
> > +	/* Fixed links and 802.3z are handled without needing a PHY */
> > +	if (pl->link_an_mode == MLO_AN_FIXED ||
> > +	    (pl->link_an_mode == MLO_AN_INBAND &&
> > +	     phy_interface_mode_is_8023z(pl->link_interface)))
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	status = acpi_node_get_property_reference(fwnode, "phy-handle", 0,
> > +						  &args);
> > +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !is_acpi_device_node(args.fwnode))
> > +		status = acpi_node_get_property_reference(fwnode, "phy", 0,
> > +							  &args);
> > +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !is_acpi_device_node(args.fwnode))
> > +		status = acpi_node_get_property_reference(fwnode,
> > +							  "phy-device", 0,
> > +							  &args);
> 
> This is a copy-and-paste of phylink_of_phy_connect() without much
> thought.
> 
> There is no need to duplicate the legacy DT functionality of
> phy/phy-device/phy-handle in ACPI - there is no legacy to support,
> so it's pointless trying to find one of three properties here.
> 
> I'd prefer both the DT and ACPI variants to be more integrated, so
> we don't have two almost identical functions except for the firmware
> specific detail.

Also, I don't see any ACPI folk in the list of recipients to your
series.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up