Hello Nicolas

I have just sent a new patch to try to fix the problems you
raised.

Please let me know if

   [PATCH (net.git)] stmmac: fix and review the ptp registration

actually covers and fixes the points.

FYI, I am trying to review the PTP, especially for
for the GMAC4, in these days so I will send other
patches on top of this if OK.

Thanks for your advice and warning.

Peppe

On 10/19/2016 6:16 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
Hello,

I noticed a recently added commit 7086605a6a ("stmmac: fix error check
when init ptp") to the mainline linux tree from you. This commit is
wrong.  The affected code now reads as:

int stmmac_ptp_register(struct stmmac_priv *priv)
{
        spin_lock_init(&priv->ptp_lock);
        priv->ptp_clock_ops = stmmac_ptp_clock_ops;

        priv->ptp_clock = ptp_clock_register(&priv->ptp_clock_ops,
                                             priv->device);
        if (IS_ERR(priv->ptp_clock)) {
                priv->ptp_clock = NULL;
                return PTR_ERR(priv->ptp_clock);
        }

        spin_lock_init(&priv->ptp_lock);

        netdev_dbg(priv->dev, "Added PTP HW clock successfully\n");

        return 0;
}

Firstly, you basically reverted the change I did with commit
efee95f42b ("ptp_clock: future-proofing drivers against PTP subsystem
becoming optional").  Please have a look at that commit and ponder its
implications.

Secondly, the error you're actually returning to the caller with your
patch is actually PTR_ERR(NULL) which is basically a more convoluted way
to return the same value as what was returned before your patch, which
is probably not what you intended.

And finally you added a needless initialization of priv->ptp_lock given
that this was already done a few lines before that addition.

Was this patch actually reviewed?


Nicolas


Reply via email to