From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756525AbcAIWJ1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:09:27 -0500 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:44652 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756083AbcAIWJ0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:09:26 -0500 Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 23:09:24 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn To: Guenter Roeck Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 1/2] net: tc35815: Fix build error due to missed API change Message-ID: <20160109220924.GF6877@lunn.ch> References: <1452374494-18752-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <20160109213614.GC6877@lunn.ch> <5691808A.1010301@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5691808A.1010301@roeck-us.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >Hi Guenter > > > >You fix looks right, but i'm wondering about the code which is being > >fixed. > > > >How can phydev ever evaluate to true, given the break statement? Can > >this code every detect multiple PHYs? I think not. > > > >Either the break needs to be removed, or we just replace the whole lot > >with phy_find_first(). > > > > Hi Andrew, > > you are right, the current code is pretty pointless. > > I would suggest to use phy_find_first(). Me too. > Should I submit a separate patch, or replace my patch with v2 ? I say a v2 which uses phy_find_first() and include in the changelog why the current code is pointless and so the change to phy_find_first(). Thanks Andrew