[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MehZVdbYpGLH76YE_fJA2q=Wojg5zOV2obkn8M6EBXiYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 18:47:46 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: make for_each_property_of_node() available to to !OF
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:32 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68korg> wrote:
>
> Hi Bartosz,
>
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2024 at 11:49 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
> > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> >
> > for_each_property_of_node() is a macro and so doesn't have a stub inline
> > function for !OF. Move it out of the relevant #ifdef to make it available
> > to all users.
>
> Thanks for your patch, which is now commit ad8ee969d7e34dd3 ("of: make
> for_each_property_of_node() available to to !OF") in dt-rh/for-next
>
> > Fixes: 611cad720148 ("dt: add of_alias_scan and of_alias_get_id")
>
> How is this related?
>
This commit added that macro in the wrong place. Back then it was
called differently, it got later renamed but this is the original
commit that provided it.
> > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> > ---
> > I have an upcoming driver that will use this but which can also be built
> > on non-DT systems. I'd like to get that in as a fix to avoid inter-tree
> > dependencies later.
>
> Do you have a link?
>
Sure, it's here: https://github.com/brgl/linux/tree/topic/gpio-virtual-consumer
> > --- a/include/linux/of.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> > @@ -362,9 +362,6 @@ extern struct device_node *of_get_cpu_state_node(struct device_node *cpu_node,
> > int index);
> > extern u64 of_get_cpu_hwid(struct device_node *cpun, unsigned int thread);
> >
> > -#define for_each_property_of_node(dn, pp) \
> > - for (pp = dn->properties; pp != NULL; pp = pp->next)
> > -
> > extern int of_n_addr_cells(struct device_node *np);
> > extern int of_n_size_cells(struct device_node *np);
> > extern const struct of_device_id *of_match_node(
> > @@ -892,6 +889,9 @@ static inline int of_prop_val_eq(struct property *p1, struct property *p2)
> > !memcmp(p1->value, p2->value, (size_t)p1->length);
> > }
> >
> > +#define for_each_property_of_node(dn, pp) \
> > + for (pp = dn->properties; pp != NULL; pp = pp->next)
>
> Is this safe if !OF? Can dn be NULL?
>
The way I use it[1], it's safe but it's a good point, I'll send a follow-up.
Thanks,
Bart
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
[1] https://github.com/brgl/linux/blob/topic/gpio-virtual-consumer/drivers/gpio/gpio-virtuser.c#L878
Powered by blists - more mailing lists