Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 1/6] net: phy: change of_phy_leds() to fwnode_phy_leds()

[Jijie Shao]

on 2025/12/17 18:37, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 20:57:00 +0800
> Jijie Shao <shaojijie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Change of_phy_leds() to fwnode_phy_leds(), to support
> > of node, acpi node, and software node together.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jijie Shao <shaojijie@xxxxxxxxxx>
> One minor suggestion inline. It is a 'while you are here'
> and whilst there are uses of the _scoped loops
> in drivers/net I'm not sure how much appetite there is
> for using them wider.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> > ---
> >   drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++-------------------
> >   1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> > index 8
> > -
> > -	if (!node)
> > +	if (!fwnode)
> >   		return 0;
> >   
> > -	leds = of_get_child_by_name(node, "leds");
> > +	leds = fwnode_get_named_child_node(fwnode, "leds");
> >   	if (!leds)
> >   		return 0;
> >   
> > @@ -3311,17 +3308,17 @@ static int of_phy_leds(struct phy_device *phydev)
> >   		goto exit;
> >   	}
> >   
> > -	for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(leds, led) {
> > -		err = of_phy_led(phydev, led);
> > +	fwnode_for_each_available_child_node(leds, led) {
> Maybe use the _scoped version to simplify this a little given
> you are changing it.


Yes, it is indeed necessary to use fwnode_for_each_available_child_node_scoped()

Thanks,
Jijie Shao