[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGETcx_CL9P3svctyDuGpavG4Ykd+o2G-rxDAE5OUvxL+sj6xA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 11:01:44 -0800
From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/5] of: property: Skip adding device links to
suppliers that aren't devices
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 7:18 AM Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 5:00 PM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Some devices need to be initialized really early and can't wait for
> > driver core or drivers to be functional. These devices are typically
> > initialized without creating a struct device for their device nodes.
> >
> > If a supplier ends up being one of these devices, skip trying to add
> > device links to them.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/of/property.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
> > index f16f85597ccc..21c9d251318a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> > @@ -1038,6 +1038,7 @@ static int of_link_to_phandle(struct device *dev, struct device_node *sup_np,
> > struct device *sup_dev;
> > int ret = 0;
> > struct device_node *tmp_np = sup_np;
> > + int is_populated;
> >
> > of_node_get(sup_np);
> > /*
> > @@ -1062,9 +1063,10 @@ static int of_link_to_phandle(struct device *dev, struct device_node *sup_np,
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> > sup_dev = get_dev_from_fwnode(&sup_np->fwnode);
> > + is_populated = of_node_check_flag(sup_np, OF_POPULATED);
> > of_node_put(sup_np);
> > if (!sup_dev)
> > - return -EAGAIN;
> > + return is_populated ? 0 : -EAGAIN;
>
> You're only using the flag in one spot and a comment would be good
> here, so I'd just do:
>
> if (of_node_check_flag(sup_np, OF_POPULATED))
> return 0; /* Early device without a struct device */
Hi Rob,
Thanks for the review.
I'm using the flag to keep the error handling code simple/cleaner. I
can't do the check like that after I do a put on the sup_np.
Yeah, I was actually planning to add a dev_dbg() message when this
happens and returning a -EINVAL (that'll be ignored by the caller)
instead of -EAGAIN (that's NOT ignored by the caller).
Looks like these changes go pulled into driver-core-next. So I'll send
a delta patch to add the dbg message and also address you nit on the
other patch.
Thanks,
Saravana
Powered by blists - more mailing lists