> > +#define MODULE_EEPROM_PAGE 0
> > +#define MODULE_EEPROM_OFFSET 0
> > +#define MODULE_EEPROM_LENGTH 1
> > +#define MODULE_EEPROM_I2C_ADDR 0x50
> > +
> > +static int module_flash_fw_work_init(struct ethtool_module_fw_flash
> *module_fw,
> > + struct net_device *dev,
> > + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) {
> > + const struct ethtool_ops *ops = dev->ethtool_ops;
> > + struct ethtool_module_eeprom page_data = {};
> > + struct module_sff8024_id_rpl *rpl;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + /* Fetch the SFF-8024 Identifier Value. For all supported standards, it
> > + * is located at I2C address 0x50, byte 0. See section 4.1 in SFF-8024,
> > + * revision 4.9.
> > + */
> > + page_data.page = MODULE_EEPROM_PAGE;
> > + page_data.offset = MODULE_EEPROM_OFFSET;
> > + page_data.length = MODULE_EEPROM_LENGTH;
> > + page_data.i2c_address = MODULE_EEPROM_I2C_ADDR;
>
> Please use better names - these aren't any better than using integers.
>
> Maybe use SFP_PHYS_ID for the offset?
>
> > + page_data.data = kmalloc(page_data.length, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!page_data.data)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + err = ops->get_module_eeprom_by_page(dev, &page_data, extack);
> > + if (err < 0)
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + rpl = (struct module_sff8024_id_rpl *)page_data.data;
>
> What purpose does this structure of a single byte serve? To me, it just
> obfuscates the code.
>
> u8 phys_id;
>
> ...
> page_data.offset = SFP_PHYS_ID;
> page_data.length = sizeof(phys_id);
> page_data.data = &phys_id;
> ...
> switch (phys_id) {
>
> will work just as well, and be more explicit about what's actually going on
> here. It doesn't mean that I have to understand what this new
> module_sff8024_id_rpl structure is. I can see that we're just getting one byte
> which is the module physical ID.
>
> You also then don't need to care about kfree()ing one byte of data structure.
OK, will change, thanks!
>
> --
> RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
> FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
