[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZNEPqwQ0H9srkxxq@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 18:37:15 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
"Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] of: dynamic: Move dead property list check into
property add/update functions
On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 04:41:55PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> The changeset code checks for a property in the deadprops list when
> adding/updating a property, but of_add_property() and
> of_update_property() do not. As the users of these functions are pretty
> simple, they have not hit this scenario or else the property lists
> would get corrupted.
Suggested-by: ? :-)
...
> +static void __of_remove_dead_property(struct device_node *np, struct property *prop)
> +{
> + struct property **next;
> +
> + /* If the property is in deadprops then it must be removed */
> + for (next = &np->deadprops; *next; next = &(*next)->next) {
> + if (*next != prop)
> + continue;
> +
> + *next = prop->next;
> + prop->next = NULL;
> + break;
Why not
if (*next == prop) {
*next = prop->next;
prop->next = NULL;
break;
}
which seems to me clearer?
> + }
> +}
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists