> > +int phy_resume(struct phy_device *phydev)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&phydev->lock);
> > + ret = phy_resume(phydev);
>
> phy_resume -> __phy_resume?
Ah, where did i put the brown paper bag :-(
Thanks
Andrew
Hi, Andrew
On 2018/2/26 7:04, Lunn wrote:
> commit f5e64032a799 ("net: phy: fix resume handling") changes the
> locking semantics for phy_resume() such that the caller now needs to
> hold the phy mutex. Not all call sites were adopted to this new
> semantic, resulting in warnings from the added
>
commit f5e64032a799 ("net: phy: fix resume handling") changes the
locking semantics for phy_resume() such that the caller now needs to
hold the phy mutex. Not all call sites were adopted to this new
semantic, resulting in warnings from the added
WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&phydev->lock)). Rather tha
