Am Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 05:54:53PM +0000 schrieb Russell King (Oracle):
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 02:09:16PM +0100, Dimitri Fedrau via B4 Relay wrote:
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_MDIO)
> > -static int phy_get_int_delay_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> > +static int phy_get_u32_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> > {
> > s32 int_delay;
> > int ret;
> > @@ -3108,7 +3108,7 @@ static int phy_get_int_delay_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> > return int_delay;
>
> Hmm. You're changing the name of this function from "int" to "u32", yet
> it still returns "int".
>
I just wanted to reuse code for retrieving the u32, I found
phy_get_int_delay_property and renamed it. But the renaming from "int"
to "u32" is wrong as you outlined.
> What range of values are you expecting to be returned by this function?
> If it's the full range of u32 values, then that overlaps with the error
> range returned by device_property_read_u32().
>
Values are in percent, u8 would already be enough, so it wouldn't
overlap with the error range.
> I'm wondering whether it would be better to follow the example set by
> these device_* functions, and pass a pointer for the value to them, and
> just have the return value indicating success/failure.
>
I would prefer this, but this would mean changes in phy_get_internal_delay
if we don't want to duplicate code, as phy_get_internal_delay relies on
phy_get_int_delay_property and we change function parameters of
phy_get_int_delay_property as you described. I would switch from
static int phy_get_int_delay_property(struct device *dev, const char *name)
to
static int phy_get_u32_property(struct device *dev, const char *name, u32 *val)
Do you agree ?
Best regards,
Dimitri Fedrau
