issue patch in next net/eth: fix link handling
Sascha Hauer
s.hauer at pengutronix.de
Fri Sep 28 04:55:24 EDT 2012
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:27:16AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 09:50 Fri 28 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:28:21AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > HI,
> > >
> > > The patch is next
> > > net/eth: fix link handling
> > >
> > > was NEVER send to the ML
> > >
> > > IIRC I was the author of the first version and this disapear
> > >
> > > Uwe and I just get this discussion on the kernel ML about patch update
> > >
> >
> > I was basically pissed off because I got the strong feeling that I spent
> > more time reviewing and testing the patch than you initially spent
> > writing it in the first place. The second version still stored apples
> > in edev->phydev->link and bananas in edev->carrier, but still did a
> > edev->carrier = dev->link.
> I did this on purpose as I do want to store the link and later export it via
> env as I get a patch here for 2 wifi driver where I'll not use the phylib
>
> so store the carrier is the correct way
Whatever it is, adding a variable to an ethernet device and then
manipulating it in both the phylib and the ethernet code is desastrous.
It must be clear everytime who owns a variable. Doing a
eth_current->carrier = CARRIER_UNKNOW;
in the ethernet code, and then:
edev->carrier = dev->link;
in the phy code is a recipe for spaghetti code.
Sascha (Who loves spaghetti - on his plate)
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
More information about the barebox
mailing list