On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 06:24:50PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > +int phy_configure(struct phy *phy, enum phy_mode mode, > > > > + union phy_configure_opts *opts) > > > > +{ > > > > + int ret; > > > > + > > > > + if (!phy) > > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > + > > > > + if (!phy->ops->configure) > > > > + return 0; > > > > > > Shouldn't you report an error to the caller ? If a caller expects the PHY to > > > be configurable, I would assume that silently ignoring the requested > > > configuration won't work great. > > > > I'm not sure. I also expect a device having to interact with multiple > > PHYs, some of them needing some configuration while some other do > > not. In that scenario, returning 0 seems to be the right thing to do. > > You could return -EOPNOTSUPP. That is common in the network stack. The > caller then has the information to decide if it should keep going, or > return an error. Ok, that works for me then. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature