Re: issue patch in next net/eth: fix link handling

[Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:27:16AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 09:50 Fri 28 Sep     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:28:21AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > HI,
> > > 
> > > 	The patch is next
> > > 	net/eth: fix link handling
> > > 
> > > 	was NEVER send to the ML
> > > 
> > > 	IIRC I was the author of the first version and this disapear
> > > 
> > > 	Uwe and I just get this discussion on the kernel ML about patch update
> > > 
> > 
> > I was basically pissed off because I got the strong feeling that I spent
> > more time reviewing and testing the patch than you initially spent
> > writing it in the first place. The second version still stored apples
> > in edev->phydev->link and bananas in edev->carrier, but still did a
> > edev->carrier = dev->link.
> I did this on purpose as I do want to store the link and later export it via
> env as I get a patch here for 2 wifi driver where I'll not use the phylib
> 
> so store the carrier is the correct way

Whatever it is, adding a variable to an ethernet device and then
manipulating it in both the phylib and the ethernet code is desastrous.
It must be clear everytime who owns a variable. Doing a

eth_current->carrier = CARRIER_UNKNOW;

in the ethernet code, and then:

edev->carrier = dev->link;

in the phy code is a recipe for spaghetti code.

Sascha (Who loves spaghetti - on his plate)

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox