RE: [PATCH v5 net-next 2/2] net: phy: micrel: Fix warn: passing zero to PTR_ERR
From: Divya.Koppera
Date: Tue Dec 06 2022 - 08:45:25 EST
Hi Andrew,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 6:38 PM
> To: Divya Koppera - I30481 <Divya.Koppera@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx;
> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx; UNGLinuxDriver
> <UNGLinuxDriver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 2/2] net: phy: micrel: Fix warn: passing zero
> to PTR_ERR
>
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
> content is safe
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/micrel.c b/drivers/net/phy/micrel.c index
> > 1bcdb828db56..650ef53fcf20 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/phy/micrel.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/micrel.c
> > @@ -3017,10 +3017,6 @@ static int lan8814_ptp_probe_once(struct
> > phy_device *phydev) {
> > struct lan8814_shared_priv *shared = phydev->shared->priv;
> >
> > - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK) ||
> > - !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NETWORK_PHY_TIMESTAMPING))
> > - return 0;
> > -
>
> Why are you removing this ?
>
I got review comment from Richard in v2 as below, making it as consistent by checking ptp_clock. So removed it in next revision.
" > static int lan8814_ptp_probe_once(struct phy_device *phydev)
> {
> struct lan8814_shared_priv *shared = phydev->shared->priv;
>
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK) ||
> !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NETWORK_PHY_TIMESTAMPING))
> return 0;
It is weird to use macros here, but not before calling ptp_clock_register.
Make it consistent by checking shared->ptp_clock instead.
That is also better form."
> Andrew