linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v5 10/10] net: gianfar: Use device_get_child_node_count

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z8Wfgx2NjB-_AyR_@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 14:24:35 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
Cc: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v5 10/10] net: gianfar: Use
 device_get_child_node_count_named()

On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 02:13:30PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On 03/03/2025 13:51, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 01:34:49PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> 
> > What about the second loop (in gfar_of_init)?
> > I mean perhaps we want to have fwnode_for_each_named_child_node()
> > and its device variant that may be also reused in the IIO code and here.
> 
> I agree the fwnode_for_each_named_child_node() would be useful. I think I
> said that already during the previous review rounds. There is plenty of code
> which could be converted to use it.


> This, however, is far more than I am willing to do in the context of a
> simple IIO driver addition. The "BD79124 ADC suupport" is already now 10
> patches, 2 of which are directly related to it.

But you already will have at least one user (IIO code) and second as in RFC.
I do not ask you to _add_ patches.

> I propose adding the for_each_named_child_node() as a separate series with
> bunch of users appended. That's be plenty of beans to count for those who
> like following the statistics :)

It would sound like an unneeded churn as we first introduce something that we
already know needs a refactoring.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko