[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1461278543.3135.16.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 08:42:23 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: frowand.list@...il.com, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
"H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] of: of_find_node_by_name - stop dropping reference
to 'from' node
On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 15:35 -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
> No. It is correct for of_find_by_name() to call of_node_put() for
> the from argument. The callers should be fixed.
I would argue that if everybody makes the same mistake then our
interface is wrong. In that case I wrote it so I think I can plead
guilty to the mistake ;-)
In hindsight, but I don't have the stammina to do a tree-wide change, I
think we should have differenciated:
of_find_xxx which does *not* drop the reference
of_find_next_xxx which does
Cheers,
Ben.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists