Hi Florian,
Florian Fainelli writes:
> On 09/22/2017 12:40 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>> There is no need to store a phy_device in dsa_slave_priv since
>> net_device already provides one. Simply s/p->phy/dev->phydev/.
>
> You can therefore remove the phy_device from dsa_slave_priv, see below
> fo
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 03:40:43PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> There is no need to store a phy_device in dsa_slave_priv since
> net_device already provides one. Simply s/p->phy/dev->phydev/.
>
> While at it, return -ENODEV when it is NULL instead of -EOPNOTSUPP.
I just did a quick poll for cal
On 09/22/2017 12:40 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> There is no need to store a phy_device in dsa_slave_priv since
> net_device already provides one. Simply s/p->phy/dev->phydev/.
You can therefore remove the phy_device from dsa_slave_priv, see below
for more comments. I will have to regress test the
There is no need to store a phy_device in dsa_slave_priv since
net_device already provides one. Simply s/p->phy/dev->phydev/.
While at it, return -ENODEV when it is NULL instead of -EOPNOTSUPP.
Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot
---
net/dsa/slave.c | 126 ++---
