Hi Andrew, Oleksij, On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 17:03:25 +0100 Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On one side I need to address the request to handle phydev specific > > thing withing the PHYlib framework. On other side, I can't do it without > > openen a pandora box of build dependencies. It will be a new main-side-quest > > to resolve build dependency of net/ethtool/ and PHYlib. The workaround is to > > put this functions to the header. > > Yes, the code is like this because phylib can be a module, and when it > is, you would end up with unresolved symbols if ethtool code is built > in. There are circular dependence as well, if both ethtool and phylib > are module. The inlines help solve this. > > However, the number of these inline functions keeps growing. At some > point, we might want a different solution. Maybe phylib needs to > register a structure of ops with ethtool when it loads? Isn't it already the case with the ethtool_phy_ops singleton ? Maybe we can add wrap the get_phy_stats / get_link_ext_stats ops to the ethtool_phy_ops ? My understanding was that this singleton served this purpose. Thanks, Maxime
