On 04.03.2019 16:44, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 03:07:24PM +, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> On 3/1/2019 1:53 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
+static inline int phy_update_link(struct phy_device *phydev)
+
On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 03:07:24PM +, Jose Abreu wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On 3/1/2019 1:53 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> >> +static inline int phy_update_link(struct phy_device *phydev)
> >> +{
> >> + if (!phydev->drv)
> >> +
Hi Andrew,
On 3/1/2019 1:53 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> +static inline int phy_update_link(struct phy_device *phydev)
>> +{
>> +if (!phydev->drv)
>> +return -EIO;
>> +
>> +if (phydev->drv->read_status)
>> +
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> +static inline int phy_update_link(struct phy_device *phydev)
> +{
> + if (!phydev->drv)
> + return -EIO;
> +
> + if (phydev->drv->read_status)
> + return phydev->drv->read_status(phydev);
> + else if
When using a C45 PHY that is in PHY_FORCING state we are currently not
taking into account that this kind of PHY has different update_link
functions.
Use the C45 Helpers instead or the driver built-in read_status() helper,
if possible.
Signed-off-by: Jose Abreu
Cc: Andrew Lunn
Cc: Florian Faine
