From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:4:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1THWM3-00087I-Mk for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:55:28 +0000 Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 10:55:24 +0200 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20120928085524.GB1322@pengutronix.de> References: <20120928022821.GF26553@game.jcrosoft.org> <20120928075047.GA1322@pengutronix.de> <20120928082716.GG26553@game.jcrosoft.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120928082716.GG26553@game.jcrosoft.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: issue patch in next net/eth: fix link handling To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:27:16AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 09:50 Fri 28 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:28:21AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > HI, > > > > > > The patch is next > > > net/eth: fix link handling > > > > > > was NEVER send to the ML > > > > > > IIRC I was the author of the first version and this disapear > > > > > > Uwe and I just get this discussion on the kernel ML about patch update > > > > > > > I was basically pissed off because I got the strong feeling that I spent > > more time reviewing and testing the patch than you initially spent > > writing it in the first place. The second version still stored apples > > in edev->phydev->link and bananas in edev->carrier, but still did a > > edev->carrier = dev->link. > I did this on purpose as I do want to store the link and later export it via > env as I get a patch here for 2 wifi driver where I'll not use the phylib > > so store the carrier is the correct way Whatever it is, adding a variable to an ethernet device and then manipulating it in both the phylib and the ethernet code is desastrous. It must be clear everytime who owns a variable. Doing a eth_current->carrier = CARRIER_UNKNOW; in the ethernet code, and then: edev->carrier = dev->link; in the phy code is a recipe for spaghetti code. Sascha (Who loves spaghetti - on his plate) -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox