[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZQf6zTsoZDFaIgHO@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 10:22:53 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] gpiolib: replace find_chip_by_name() with
gpio_device_find_by_label()
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 05:03:22PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
>
> Remove all remaining uses of find_chip_by_name() (and subsequently:
> gpiochip_find()) from gpiolib.c and use the new
> gpio_device_find_by_label() instead.
...
> -static int gpiochip_match_name(struct gpio_chip *gc, void *data)
> -{
> - const char *name = data;
> -
> - return !strcmp(gc->label, name);
And this we had no check for the label being NULL...
...
> for (p = &table->table[0]; p->key; p++) {
> + struct gpio_device *gdev __free(gpio_device_put) = NULL;
> + gdev = gpio_device_find_by_label(p->key);
> + if (!gdev) {
I haven't got the fix for gpio-sim, shouldn't we have the same here, i.e.
definition being done together with the assignment when __free() is in use?
> }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists