[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201221091022.GF26370@paasikivi.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 11:10:22 +0200
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devel@...ica.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
lenb@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, yong.zhi@...el.com,
bingbu.cao@...el.com, tian.shu.qiu@...el.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
robert.moore@...el.com, erik.kaneda@...el.com, pmladek@...e.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com,
jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org, kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com,
kitakar@...il.com, jorhand@...ux.microsoft.com,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/12] property: Return true in
fwnode_device_is_available for NULL ops
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:43:27PM +0000, Daniel Scally wrote:
> Some types of fwnode_handle do not implement the device_is_available()
> check, such as those created by software_nodes. There isn't really a
> meaningful way to check for the availability of a device that doesn't
> actually exist, so if the check isn't implemented just assume that the
> "device" is present.
>
> Suggested-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
> Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
For this and the 3rd patch:
Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
--
Sakari Ailus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists