> > Hi Rasmus
> >
> > This works, but i think i prefer adding mv88e6xxx_smi_dual_chip_write,
> > mv88e6xxx_smi_dual_chip_read, and create a
> > mv88e6xxx_smi_single_chip_ops.
>
> Hi Andrew
>
> Now that Vivien's "net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: refine SMI support" is in
> master, do you still prefer introducing a third bus_ops structure
> (mv88e6xxx_smi_dual_direct_ops ?), or would the approach of adding
> chip->sw_addr in the smi_direct_{read/write} functions be ok (which
> would then require changing the indirect callers to pass 0 instead of
> chip->swaddr).
Hi Rasmus
I would still prefer a new bus_ops.
Thanks
Andrew
