[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YzNjfAvqSRu5VTiy@paasikivi.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 20:56:28 +0000
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] device property: Keep dev_fwnode() and
dev_fwnode_const() separate
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the set.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 05:28:17PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> It's not fully correct to take a const parameter pointer to a struct
> and return a non-const pointer to a member of that struct.
I guess you could go as far as saying it's not at all correct. :-)
>
> Instead, introduce a const version of the dev_fwnode() API which takes
> and returns const pointers and use it where it's applicable.
>
> Suggested-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
> Fixes: aade55c86033 ("device property: Add const qualifier to device_get_match_data() parameter")
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
For the set:
Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists