[PATCH net-next 3/3] net: stmmac: Add glue layer for Spacemit K3 SoC

[Inochi Amaoto]

On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 11:28:49AM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 11:13:50AM +0000, Yao Zi wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 12:36:08PM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > > +static int spacemit_dwmac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > +	of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "tx-internal-delay-ps", &tx_delay);
> > > +	of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "rx-internal-delay-ps", &rx_delay);
> > 
> > According to of.h, of_property_read_u32, which in turn calls
> > of_property_read_u32_array, could fail with -ENODATA if there's no value
> > associated with the property. Should the case be handled?
> 
> You cut too much. This had:
> 
> 	unsigned int tx_delay = 0;
> 	unsigned int rx_delay = 0;
> 
> at the start of the function.
> 
> of_property_read_u32_array() says:
> 
>  * @out_values: pointer to return value, modified only if return value is 0.
> 
> and of_property_read_u32() passes &tx_delay or &rx_delay to this. Thus,
> if any error occurs, these will be zero. In other words, a missing
> property is equivalent to setting these to zero, which is entirely
> reasonable.
> 
> However, "unsigned int" _may_ be type equivalent to "u32", but really
> these should be "u32" if of_property_read_u32_array() is used.
> 

Good catch! I always treat "unsigned int" to "u32" implictly, I will 
change to u32 for as an precise type.

Regards,
Inochi