From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753479AbdGXQcb (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2017 12:32:31 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:35106 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751370AbdGXQcY (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2017 12:32:24 -0400 Cc: Sudeep Holla , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Frank Rowand Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: return of_get_cpu_node from of_cpu_device_node_get if CPUs are not registered To: Rob Herring References: <1500904513-10483-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: <75ed0ec4-2276-c098-f7d4-7d9ce168f10c@arm.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:32:21 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 24/07/17 17:00, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> Instead of the callsites choosing between of_cpu_device_node_get if the >> CPUs are registered as of_node is populated by then and of_get_cpu_node >> when the CPUs are not yet registered as CPU of_nodes are not yet stashed >> thereby needing to parse the device tree, we can call of_get_cpu_node >> in case the CPUs are not yet registered. >> >> This will allow to use of_cpu_device_node_get anywhere hiding the >> details from the caller. >> >> Cc: Rob Herring >> Cc: Frank Rowand >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >> include/linux/of_device.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> Hi Rob, >> >> Let me know if you are OK with this change. I keep seeing different >> drivers calling of_get_cpu_node or of_cpu_device_node_get based on what >> they are aware of or copying from other place without knowing the >> details. I am trying to avoid that and ask to use of_cpu_device_node_get >> at all places instead. > > Seems fine to me. > > Acked-by: Rob Herring > Thanks. Can you take it through your tree itself ? I can make any follow patches(if any) once this lands in the tree. I don't have any for now just to avoid all cross dependencies. -- Regards, Sudeep From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: return of_get_cpu_node from of_cpu_device_node_get if CPUs are not registered Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:32:21 +0100 Message-ID: <75ed0ec4-2276-c098-f7d4-7d9ce168f10c@arm.com> References: <1500904513-10483-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Sudeep Holla , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Frank Rowand List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 24/07/17 17:00, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> Instead of the callsites choosing between of_cpu_device_node_get if the >> CPUs are registered as of_node is populated by then and of_get_cpu_node >> when the CPUs are not yet registered as CPU of_nodes are not yet stashed >> thereby needing to parse the device tree, we can call of_get_cpu_node >> in case the CPUs are not yet registered. >> >> This will allow to use of_cpu_device_node_get anywhere hiding the >> details from the caller. >> >> Cc: Rob Herring >> Cc: Frank Rowand >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >> include/linux/of_device.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> Hi Rob, >> >> Let me know if you are OK with this change. I keep seeing different >> drivers calling of_get_cpu_node or of_cpu_device_node_get based on what >> they are aware of or copying from other place without knowing the >> details. I am trying to avoid that and ask to use of_cpu_device_node_get >> at all places instead. > > Seems fine to me. > > Acked-by: Rob Herring > Thanks. Can you take it through your tree itself ? I can make any follow patches(if any) once this lands in the tree. I don't have any for now just to avoid all cross dependencies. -- Regards, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html