linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 33/37] sound/soc: use .dev.of_node instead of .node in struct of

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 5 Apr 2010 17:47:48 -0600
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>
Cc:	monstr@...str.eu, gregkh@...e.de, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	sfr@...b.auug.org.au, jgarzik@...ox.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	jeremy.kerr@...onical.com, James.Bottomley@...e.de,
	broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	microblaze-uclinux@...e.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 33/37] sound/soc: use .dev.of_node instead of .node in 
	struct of_device

Hi Ben, thanks for the comment.  Reply below...

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:06:50AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
>> .node is being removed
[...]
>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
>> @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static struct snd_soc_ops mpc8610_hpcd_ops = {
>>  static int mpc8610_hpcd_probe(struct of_device *ofdev,
>>       const struct of_device_id *match)
>>  {
>> -     struct device_node *np = ofdev->node;
>> +     struct device_node *np = ofdev->dev.of_node;
>>       struct device_node *codec_np = NULL;
>>       struct device_node *guts_np = NULL;
>>       struct device_node *dma_np = NULL;
>
> This looks like one case where an inline function would have been a
> help.

In what regard (how would you like it to look)?  The node pointer
location is very unlikely to move again, and I prefer the clarity of
direct dereferencing.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/