On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 19:34:10 +0200 Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> To an untrained eye this looks pretty weird. > >> > >> I see, I'm not quite sure how to address this comment. > > > > If ndev->phydev sometimes is not-NULL on open, then that's a valid > > state to be in. Why not make sure that we're always in that state > > and can depend on ndev->phydev rather than rummaging around for > > the phy_device instance. > > Nope, the problem is in probe() in this case.
In that case it would be cleaner to pass fep and phydev as arguments into fec_enet_clk_enable(), rather than netdev, and have only probe() do the necessary dance.
