On 08.11.2018 23:24, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 10:36:33PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> As a heritage from the very early days of phylib member interrupts is
>> defined as u32 even though it's just a flag whether interrupts are
>> enabled. So we can change it to a bitfield member. In addition change
>> the code dealing with this member in a way that it's clear we're
>> dealing with a bool value.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Actually this member isn't needed at all and could be replaced with
>> a parameter in phy_driver->config_intr. But this would mean an API
>> change, maybe I come up with a proposal later.
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/phy/phy.c |  2 +-
>>  include/linux/phy.h   | 10 +++++-----
>>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
>> index dd5bff955..a5e6acfe6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
>> @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ static int phy_clear_interrupt(struct phy_device *phydev)
>>   *
>>   * Returns 0 on success or < 0 on error.
>>   */
>> -static int phy_config_interrupt(struct phy_device *phydev, u32 interrupts)
>> +static int phy_config_interrupt(struct phy_device *phydev, bool interrupts)
>>  {
>>      phydev->interrupts = interrupts;
>>      if (phydev->drv->config_intr)
>> diff --git a/include/linux/phy.h b/include/linux/phy.h
>> index 5dd85c441..fc90af152 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/phy.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/phy.h
>> @@ -263,8 +263,8 @@ static inline struct mii_bus *devm_mdiobus_alloc(struct 
>> device *dev)
>>  void devm_mdiobus_free(struct device *dev, struct mii_bus *bus);
>>  struct phy_device *mdiobus_scan(struct mii_bus *bus, int addr);
>>  
>> -#define PHY_INTERRUPT_DISABLED      0x0
>> -#define PHY_INTERRUPT_ENABLED       0x80000000
>> +#define PHY_INTERRUPT_DISABLED      0
>> +#define PHY_INTERRUPT_ENABLED       1
> 
> Hi Heiner
> 
> Since this is passed around as a bool, false/true would be better than
> 0/1.
> 
I thought about that before submitting the patch. I preferred to go with
0/1 because we assign this value to a 1 bit bitfield member which supports
values 0/1 only. So neither option is perfect IMO.

>       Andrew
> 
Heiner

Reply via email to