Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:28:59 +0100
From:   "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To:     Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com>
Cc:     "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "peppe.cavallaro@st.com" <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
        "alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com" <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
        "joabreu@synopsys.com" <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
        "mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com" <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com" 
        <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] net: fec_ptp: add clock rate zero check
Message-ID: <20210616132859.GE22278@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
References: <20210616091426.13694-1-qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com>
 <20210616091426.13694-2-qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com>
 <20210616102038.GB22278@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <VI1PR04MB68004D29895652864B4C1D20E60F9@VI1PR04MB6800.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR04MB68004D29895652864B4C1D20E60F9@VI1PR04MB6800.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: Russell King (Oracle) <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Joakim,

On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 11:40:29AM +0000, Joakim Zhang wrote:
> Do you mean that print an error message then return directly? It seems better.

Nearly - one has to ensure that the cleanup functions don't provoke a
crash though. I notice fec_ptp_stop() makes use of fep->time_keep
and also fep->ptp_clock.

fep->time_keep is initialised after where you need to test for zero
cycle_speed, so the initialisation would need moving earlier.

I would have thought that ftp->ptp_clock should be NULL, so that's
probably okay, but should be checked that this assumption is in fact
true.

> if (!fep->cycle_speed) {
> 	dev_err(&fep->pdev->dev, "PTP clock rate should not be zero!\n");

I'd still say something like "PTP clock rate should not be zero,
disabling PTP" - say what's wrong and what we are doing. Also,
please avoid exclaimation marks in error messages.

Thanks.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!