[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YqCUv2tSwzALSVsm@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 15:23:27 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] spi: Use device_find_first_child() instead of
custom approach
On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 02:03:32PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 02:49:14PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
...
> Why not exactly? match_true() above and device_match_any() have the
> same signature from what I can tell:
> static int match_true(struct device *dev, void *data)
> int device_match_any(struct device *dev, const void *unused)
>
> What am I missing, the const?
Yep! Compiler is very unhappy about it.
> > I agree that all thing should be using _any instead of _first.
>
> Yes, so let's fix it please, don't propagate bad patterns.
Will do, thanks!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists