Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 14:50:10 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Fix phy_modify() semantic difference fallout
Message-ID: <20180109145010.GL17719@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
References: <1515496281-10988-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be>
 <20180109141008.GD27447@lunn.ch>
 <20180109142248.GG17719@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
 <20180109144813.GC724@lunn.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180109144813.GC724@lunn.ch>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:48:13PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > I took a quick look at the uses of phy_modify(). I don't see any uses
> > > of the return code other than as an error indicator. So having it
> > > return 0 on success seems like a better fix.
> > 
> > I'd like to avoid that, because I don't want to have yet another
> > accessor that needs to be used for advertisment modification (where
> > we need to know if we changed any bits.)
> > 
> > That's why this accessor returns the old value.
> 
> Hi Russell
> 
> where exactly is this use case? I've not found it yet.
> 
> I can understand your argument. But how long it is going to take us to
> find all the breakage because the return value has changed meaning?
> 
> The trade off is adding yet another accessor vs debugging and fixing
> the repercussions.
> 
> I think i prefer not breaking existing code.

Please introduce a new accessor then.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up