Hi Simon,
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 13:43:36 +0100 Simon Horman horms@kernel.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 10:28:03AM +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
With the introduction of phy_link_topology, we have the ability to keep track of PHY devices that sit behind a net_device. While we still can only attach one single PHY to a netdev, we can look at all these PHYs through netlink, with the ETHTOOL_MSG_PHY_GET command.
Moreover, netlink commands that are targeting PHY devices also now allow specifying which PHY we want to address in a given netlink command.
That whole process comes with its own complexity, and a few bugs were dicovered over the months following the introduction of
Hi Maxime,
As it seems like there will be a v2 anyway: discovered
Thanks :)
phy_link_topology.
...
+static struct phy_driver nsim_virtual_phy_drv[] = {
- {
.name = "Netdevsim virtual PHY driver",.get_features = nsim_get_features,.match_phy_device = nsim_match_phy_device,.config_aneg = nsim_config_aneg,.read_status = nsim_read_status,- },
+};
+module_phy_driver(nsim_virtual_phy_drv);
I see that this has been flagged by Kernel Test Robot, but as I had already written most of this it seems worth sending anyway.
I am somewhat guessing at the why here, but I see build failures with this patch applied:
ld: drivers/net/netdevsim/phy.o: in function `phy_module_init': phy.c:(.init.text+0x0): multiple definition of `init_module'; drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.o:netdev.c:(.init.text+0x0): first defined here ld: drivers/net/netdevsim/phy.o: in function `phy_module_exit': phy.c:(.exit.text+0x0): multiple definition of `cleanup_module'; drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.o:netdev.c:(.exit.text+0x0): first defined here
I am guessing that this is because above module_phy_driver() will define init_module and phy_module_exit functions. But the following lines near the end of drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c also define functions with those names.
module_init(nsim_module_init); module_exit(nsim_module_exit);
...
I just received the kernel test robot report indeed :( Thanks for the investigation ! I'll rework that part, sorry about that :/
Maxime