On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 02:55:10PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Add a check whether the 'struct device_node' pointer passed to
> of_mdiobus_register() is an available (aka enabled) node in the Device
> Tree.
>
> Rationale for doing this are cases where an Ethernet MAC provides a MDIO
> bus controller and node, and an additional Ethernet MAC might be
> connecting its PHY/switches to that first MDIO bus controller, while
> still embedding one internally which is therefore marked as "disabled".
>
> Instead of sprinkling checks like these in callers of
> of_mdiobus_register(), do this in a central location.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> drivers/of/of_mdio.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_mdio.c b/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
> index b622b33dbf93..2f497790be1b 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
> @@ -209,6 +209,10 @@ int of_mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *np)
> bool scanphys = false;
> int addr, rc;
>
> + /* Do not continue if the node is disabled */
> + if (!of_device_is_available(np))
> + return -EINVAL;
Could be bike shedding, but would ENODEV be better?
Some callers are going to have to look at the return value and decide
if it is a fatal error, and fail the whole probe, or a non-fatal error
and they should keep going. ENODEV seems less fatal...
Other than that,
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>
Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
