On 07/18/2018 11:15 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> The situation described in the comment can occur also with
> PHY_IGNORE_INTERRUPT, therefore change the condition to include it.
Yes indeed! You might want to locate the offending commit to provide a
fixes tag so this could be backported to stable trees.
Also, for net-next, we may want to introduce a helper which checks for
phydev->irq != PHY_POLL that we can use consistently as a way to tell
that the conditions applies to either PHY_IGNORE_INTERRUPT or
phydev->irq is valid?
>
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallwe...@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/phy/phy.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> index d2baedc4..914fe8e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> @@ -519,7 +519,7 @@ static int phy_start_aneg_priv(struct phy_device *phydev,
> bool sync)
> * negotiation may already be done and aneg interrupt may not be
> * generated.
> */
> - if (phy_interrupt_is_valid(phydev) && (phydev->state == PHY_AN)) {
> + if (phydev->irq != PHY_POLL && phydev->state == PHY_AN) {
> err = phy_aneg_done(phydev);
> if (err > 0) {
> trigger = true;
>
--
Florian
