Hi Iyappan, I agree with Andrew.
Let's re-post the patch after addressing Andrew's comment. Thanks, Keyur > -----Original Message----- > From: Iyappan Subramanian [mailto:isubraman...@apm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:19 PM > To: Andrew Lunn > Cc: David Miller; netdev; Florian Fainelli; David Laight; linux-arm- > ker...@lists.infradead.org; patches; Keyur Chudgar > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] drivers: net: xgene-v2: Add MDIO > support > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> wrote: > >> @@ -511,9 +512,9 @@ static int xge_close(struct net_device *ndev) { > >> struct xge_pdata *pdata = netdev_priv(ndev); > >> > >> - netif_carrier_off(ndev); > >> netif_stop_queue(ndev); > >> xge_mac_disable(pdata); > >> + phy_stop(ndev->phydev); > >> > >> xge_intr_disable(pdata); > >> xge_free_irq(ndev); > >> @@ -683,9 +684,14 @@ static int xge_probe(struct platform_device > *pdev) > >> if (ret) > >> goto err; > >> > >> + spin_lock_init(&pdata->mdio_lock); > >> + > > > > ... > > > >> +static int xge_mdio_write(struct mii_bus *bus, int phy_id, int reg, > >> +u16 data) { > >> + struct xge_pdata *pdata = bus->priv; > >> + u32 done, val = 0; > >> + u8 wait = 10; > >> + int ret = 0; > >> + > >> + spin_lock(&pdata->mdio_lock); > >> + > >> + SET_REG_BITS(&val, PHY_ADDR, phy_id); > >> + SET_REG_BITS(&val, REG_ADDR, reg); > >> + xge_wr_csr(pdata, MII_MGMT_ADDRESS, val); > >> + > >> + xge_wr_csr(pdata, MII_MGMT_CONTROL, data); > >> + do { > >> + usleep_range(5, 10); > >> + done = xge_rd_csr(pdata, MII_MGMT_INDICATORS); > >> + } while ((done & MII_MGMT_BUSY) && wait--); > >> + > >> + if (done & MII_MGMT_BUSY) { > >> + dev_err(&bus->dev, "MII_MGMT write failed\n"); > >> + ret = -ETIMEDOUT; > >> + } > >> + > >> + spin_unlock(&pdata->mdio_lock); > >> + > >> + return ret; > >> +} > >> + > >> +static int xge_mdio_read(struct mii_bus *bus, int phy_id, int reg) > { > >> + struct xge_pdata *pdata = bus->priv; > >> + u32 data, done, val = 0; > >> + u8 wait = 10; > >> + > >> + spin_lock(&pdata->mdio_lock); > >> + > > > > Hi Iyappan > > > > Please could you explain what this lock is protecting which the > > mii_bus mdio_lock in mdio_bus.c is not protecting? > > Hi Keyur, > > Please could you explain what this lock is protecting which the mii_bus > mdio_lock in mdio_bus.c is not protecting? > > I agree with him. Actually there is a mutex on mdio_bus. So the mdio > bus read and write are locked. we don't need the lock. > > Do you agree ? > > > > > > Thanks > > Andrew
