[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YPq28BNOmqZPdRqq@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 15:32:48 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
rafael@...nel.org, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] device property: Check fwnode->secondary in
fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint()
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 09:19:28PM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote:
> Sensor drivers often check for an endpoint to make sure that they're
> connected to a consuming device like a CIO2 during .probe(). Some of
> those endpoints might be in the form of software_nodes assigned as
> a secondary to the device's fwnode_handle. Account for this possibility
> in fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint() to avoid having to do it in the
> sensor drivers themselves.
...
> + ep = fwnode_call_ptr_op(parent, graph_get_next_endpoint, prev);
> +
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ep) && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent) &&
> + !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent->secondary))
Nit-pick, I would put it like:
if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent->secondary) && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent) &&
IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ep))
or
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ep) &&
!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent->secondary) && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent))
for the sake of logical split.
> + ep = fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint(parent->secondary, NULL);
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists