[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yzv/Cgc28tNAYXIE@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2022 12:38:18 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] device property: Allow const parameter to
dev_fwnode()
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 12:34:56PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 12:21:25PM +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.
> >
> > Instead, introduce a const version of the dev_fwnode() API which takes
> > and returns const pointers and use it where it's applicable.
> >
> > With this, convert dev_fwnode() to be a macro wrapper on top of const
> > and non-const APIs that chooses one based on the type.
>
> Hmm... it missed the device_get_match_data() implementation (reverse) change
> somehow. And it still compiles to me, probably I rebased wrongly and the hunk
> went to another patch. I'll investigate and resend as v4 the fixed version.
Ah, sorry, I mixed this with previous version of the patch here, so everything
is fine in v3!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists