linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/1] dt: add of_get_child

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

Date:	Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:37:46 +0400
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>
To:	Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@...aro.org>
CC:	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
	rob.herring@...xeda.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/1] dt: add of_get_child_count helper function

Hello.

On 11-02-2012 21:22, Dong Aisheng wrote:

> Currently most code to get child count in kernel are almost same,
> add a helper to implement this function for dt to use.

> Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng<dong.aisheng@...aro.org>
> Cc: Grant Likely<grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
> Cc: Rob Herring<rob.herring@...xeda.com>

> ---
> Hi Rob,

> Since my imx pinctrl driver series still depends on the pinctrl core dt
> binding patch which is still not in mainline, i'd like this pure dt patch
> go separately first in case others want to use.

> changes v2->v3:
>   Addressed some people's comments:
>   * do not use assignment as expression
>   * return 0 for non-dt case

> Changes v1->v2:
>   * change the name from of_get_child_number to of_get_child_count
> ---
>   include/linux/of.h |   16 ++++++++++++++++
>   1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h
> index a75a831..ae242ef 100644
> --- a/include/linux/of.h
> +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> @@ -195,6 +195,17 @@ extern struct device_node *of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node,
>   	for (child = of_get_next_child(parent, NULL); child != NULL; \
>   	     child = of_get_next_child(parent, child))
>
> +static inline int of_get_child_count(const struct device_node *np)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *child = NULL;
> +	int num = 0;
> +
> +	while ((child = of_get_next_child(np, child)) != NULL)

    Doesn't scripts/checkpatch.pl complain here?

> +		num++;
> +
> +	return num;
> +}
> +

WBR, Sergei
--
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/