Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-28 Thread Jörn Engel
On Wed, 27 July 2005 14:34:19 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > > Ok, here I won't agree to disagree with you. !foo as a check for > > NULL is a reasonable idea, but not my style. If that's the preferred > > style for the kernel, I will do that. > > > > But (var == constant) is a style that

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-27 Thread Randy Dunlap
> On Jul 27, 2005, at 13:08, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > > > > >> On Jul 25, 2005, at 16:06, Francois Romieu wrote: > >> > >> > >> > +int mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *bus) > +{ > +int i; > +int err = 0; > + > +spin_lock_init(&bus->mdio_lock); > + >

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-27 Thread Francois Romieu
Andy Fleming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : [kcalloc] > Should we move the function, then, to include/linux/slab.h? Or > somewhere else? It is already in mm/slab.c [rc = request_irq(...)] It appears in drivers/net/*c. Jeff Garzik used to suggest something similar but it does not matter as long as you

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-27 Thread Andy Fleming
On Jul 27, 2005, at 13:08, Randy Dunlap wrote: On Jul 25, 2005, at 16:06, Francois Romieu wrote: +int mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *bus) +{ +int i; +int err = 0; + +spin_lock_init(&bus->mdio_lock); + +if (NULL == bus || NULL == bus->name || +NULL == bus->re

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-27 Thread Randy Dunlap
> On Jul 25, 2005, at 16:06, Francois Romieu wrote: > > > >> +int mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *bus) > >> +{ > >> +int i; > >> +int err = 0; > >> + > >> +spin_lock_init(&bus->mdio_lock); > >> + > >> +if (NULL == bus || NULL == bus->name || > >> +NULL == bus->read |

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-27 Thread Andy Fleming
On Jul 25, 2005, at 16:06, Francois Romieu wrote: [snip] +config DAVICOM_PHY +bool "Drivers for Davicom PHYs" +depends on PHYLIB +---help--- + Currently supports dm9161e and dm9131 [snip] Yeah, I resisted splitting the patch up for this reason. Suffice it to say, you

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PHY Abstraction Layer III (now with more splitiness)

2005-07-25 Thread Francois Romieu
Andy Fleming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : > This patch contains the PHY layer itself, no phy drivers [...] > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/Kconfig b/drivers/net/phy/Kconfig > new file mode 100644 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/Kconfig [...] > +config MARVELL_PHY > + bool "Drivers for Marvell P