[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Ve-5=6bsF1mMQ4RceobV=OsR6VwZeP==iFGQJLEbt0-yg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2022 17:10:23 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/5] device property: Constify fwnode_handle_get()
On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 2:35 AM Sakari Ailus
<sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 09:48:43PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > As to_of_node() suggests and the way the code in the OF and software node
> > back ends actually uses the fwnode handle, it may be constified. Do this
> > for good.
>
> How?
>
> If the fwnode is const, then the struct it contains must be presumed to be
> const, too.
Why? The idea is that we are not updating the fwnode, but the container.
The container may or may not be const. It's orthogonal, no?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists