Re: [PATCH net-next v4 6/7] net: axienet: Rearrange lifetime functions

[Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 11:34:55AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> Rearrange the lifetime functions (probe, remove, etc.) in preparation
> for the next commit. No functional change intended.

There is a lot going on in this patch. Can it be broken up a bit more?

The phase "No functional change intended" generally means, its the
same code, just in a different place in the files. This is not true of
this patch.

> +struct axienet_common {
> +	struct platform_device *pdev;
> +
> +	struct clk *axi_clk;
> +
> +	struct mutex reset_lock;

>  static inline void axienet_lock_mii(struct axienet_local *lp)
>  {
> -	if (lp->mii_bus)
> -		mutex_lock(&lp->mii_bus->mdio_lock);
> +	mutex_lock(&lp->cp->reset_lock);

This lock is different to the bus lock. This is definitely not a "no
functional change".

Please make this lock change a patch of its own, with a good commit
message which considers the consequences of this change of lock.

>  		if (!np) {
> -			dev_err(dev, "pcs-handle (preferred) or phy-handle required for 1000BaseX/SGMII\n");
> -			ret = -EINVAL;
> -			goto cleanup_mdio;
> +			dev_err(dev,
> +				"pcs-handle (preferred) or phy-handle required for 1000BaseX/SGMII\n");
> +			return -EINVAL;

That looks like a whitespace change. This is a "No functional change
intended" sort of patch. You can collect all such whitespace changes
into one patch.

>  		}
>  		lp->pcs_phy = of_mdio_find_device(np);
> -		np1 = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "lpu");
> +		np1 = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "cpu");

Interesting. Maybe you should review your own patches.


    Andrew

---
pw-bot: cr