[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAALWOA8hrtrGZKpLZCdASPWK001p41YOmvFObF=FYSi2zCSROw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 13:53:58 +0200
From: Matthijs van Duin <matthijsvanduin@...il.com>
To: Andrey Utkin <andrey_utkin@...tmail.com>
Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
"Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
Andrew Bradford <bradfa@...il.com>, kernel@...a-handheld.com,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] omapdrm: dss: drop unneeded of_node_put() on ref passed
to of_get_next_parent()
To clarify, this patch effectively reverts
commit 2ab9f5879162499e1c4e48613287e3f59e593c4f
gpu: drm: omapdrm: dss-of: add missing of_node_put after calling
of_parse_phandle
except it leaves behind unnecessary verbiage that this commit
introduced. And to be clear, that commit *should* indeed be reverted,
although preferably in its entirety obviously.
of_get_next_parent already drops a ref on its argument, so of_node_put
was never "missing" here.
Matthijs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists