issue patch in next net/eth: fix link handling

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 10:55 Fri 28 Sep     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> 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.
> 
so we need to do call net_carrier in phylib as done in the kernel
the net framework mamange the carrier by itself

as example in wifi phy up does not mean carrier on

Best Regards,
J.