Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 May 2024 10:15:17 +0200 | From | Maxime Chevallier <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: phy: phy_link_topology: Lazy-initialize the link topology |
| |
On Mon, 13 May 2024 10:07:29 +0200 Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Hello again Heiner, > > On Wed, 8 May 2024 07:44:22 +0200 > Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 07.05.2024 12:28, Maxime Chevallier wrote: > > > Having the net_device's init path for the link_topology depend on > > > IS_REACHABLE(PHYLIB)-protected helpers triggers errors when modules are being > > > built with phylib as a module as-well, as they expect netdev->link_topo > > > to be initialized. > > > > > > Move the link_topo initialization at the first PHY insertion, which will > > > both improve the memory usage, and make the behaviour more predicatble > > > and robust. > > I agree with some of the comments, as stated in my previous mail, > however I'm struggling to find the time to fix, and re-test everything, > especially before net-next closes. Would it be OK if I re-send with a > fix for the kbuild bot warning, improve the commit log as you > mentionned for patch 1 so that at least the issue can be solved ? > > I still have the netlink part of this work to send, so I definitely > will have to rework that, but with a bit less time constraints so that > I can properly re-test everything.
To clarify, I'm mostly talking about the merge of phy_link_topology_core.h into phy_link_topology.h, I fear that this could get rejected because of the added #include that would clutter a bit net/core/dev.c with functions that are barely used.
All your other comments make perfect sense to me and I'm testing these as we speak.
Regards,
Maxime
> > Best regards, > > Maxime
| |