> dsa_cpu_dsa_setups is not really meaningful and doesn't add much
> value.
I would disagree. Quoting Documentation/CodingStyle
Chapter 6: Functions
Functions should be short and sweet, and do just one thing. They should
fit on one or two screenfuls of text (the ISO/ANSI
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 03:25:47PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi Andrew, Florian,
>
> I suggest to use this RFC to agree on a consistent and robust API for
> the DSA layer. Some functions have non-intuitive names or signatures.
Nope.
What is important is getting this patchset accepted and
Hi Andrew, Florian,
I suggest to use this RFC to agree on a consistent and robust API for
the DSA layer. Some functions have non-intuitive names or signatures.
What about:
_[_]
where matches the first argument. So instead of
dsa_cpu_dsa_setup, we would have:
Hi Andrew,
Andrew Lunn writes:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:33:49AM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Andrew Lunn writes:
>>
>> > -static void dsa_switch_destroy(struct dsa_switch *ds)
>> > +void dsa_cpu_dsa_destroy(struct device_node *port_dn)
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:33:49AM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Andrew Lunn writes:
>
> > -static void dsa_switch_destroy(struct dsa_switch *ds)
> > +void dsa_cpu_dsa_destroy(struct device_node *port_dn)
> > {
> > - struct device_node *port_dn;
> > struct
Hi Andrew,
Andrew Lunn writes:
> -static void dsa_switch_destroy(struct dsa_switch *ds)
> +void dsa_cpu_dsa_destroy(struct device_node *port_dn)
> {
> - struct device_node *port_dn;
> struct phy_device *phydev;
> +
> + if (of_phy_is_fixed_link(port_dn)) {
> +
Refactor the code to setup a single DSA/CPU port into a function of
its own, and export it, so it can be used by the new binding.
Similarly, refactor the destroy code into a function.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn
---
net/dsa/dsa.c | 86