On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 10:52:33AM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 12/09/2013 10:07 AM, Peter Chen wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 09:38:17AM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > >> On 12/09/2013 07:30 AM, Peter Chen wrote: > >>> Some PHY bugs are fixed by IC logic, but these bits are not > >>> enabled by default, so we enable them at driver. > >> > >> Which bugs are fixed by enabling this bit? Is it only suspend related? > >> Can you document them or better add a pointer to the documentation. > > > > I will add more, in fact, it fixes the bug which flag BIT(1) and BIT(2) > > stands for. > > > >> > >> Further I don't like the idea of adding code, or enabling a feature on > >> certain hardware, that is broken in the first place and fixing it in a > >> later patch. Think about squashing it into the correct patch. > > > > No fixes are related with this patch, you can see there is no "-" > > at this patch. > > Yes, there isn't any broken code (thus no "-"), but you first enable a > feature in the hardware and in a later patch (this one) make it work > properly. > Sorry? I haven't enabled related hardware feature at previous patches. These two bits are enable bit, we just need to enable it. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
