> - linkmode_and(sfp_support, port->supported, caps->link_modes);
> - if (linkmode_empty(sfp_support)) {
> + if (!linkmode_and(sfp_support, port->supported, caps->link_modes)) {
> dev_err(&phydev->mdio.dev, "incompatible SFP module inserted,
> no common linkmode\n");
>From a readability perspective, i like linkmode_empty(). It is more
obvious than !linkmode_and().
None of this code is in the hot path. So we should put readability
above performance.
> /* Some PHYs may advertise, by default, not support EEE modes. So,
> * we need to clean them. In addition remove all disabled EEE modes.
> */
> - linkmode_and(phydev->advertising_eee, phydev->supported_eee,
> - phydev->advertising_eee);
> - linkmode_andnot(phydev->advertising_eee, phydev->advertising_eee,
> - phydev->eee_disabled_modes);
> -
> /* There is no "enabled" flag. If PHY is advertising, assume it is
> * kind of enabled.
> */
> - phydev->eee_cfg.eee_enabled = !linkmode_empty(phydev->advertising_eee);
> + phydev->eee_cfg.eee_enabled =
> + linkmode_and_andnot(phydev->advertising_eee,
> + phydev->advertising_eee,
> + phydev->supported_eee,
> + phydev->eee_disabled_modes);
So, which is more readable, the original or this?
Andrew
