On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 03:01:36PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> __phy_modify would return the old value of the register before it was
> modified. Thus on success, it does not return 0, but a positive value.
> Thus functions using phy_modify, which is a wrapper around
> __phy_modify, can start returning > 0 on success, rather than 0. As a
> result, breakage has been noticed in various places, where 0 was
> assumed.
>
> Code inspection does not find any current location where the return of
> the old value is currently used. So have __phy_modify return 0 on
> success. When there is a real need for the old value, either a new
> accessor can be added, or an additional parameter passed.
>
> Fixes: fea23fb591cc ("net: phy: convert read-modify-write to phy_modify()")
> Fixes: 2b74e5be17d2 ("net: phy: add phy_modify() accessor")
> Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org>
> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+rene...@glider.be>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch>
Hi David
Is there any particular reason you have not picked up this patch? Do
you want more testing? An O.K. from Russell?
Thanks
Andrew
