Hi Laurent, Tomi
Thank you for your review
> > > +/**
> > > + * of_graph_get_next_endpoint_raw() - get next endpoint node
> >
> > How about "of_graph_get_next_port_endpoint()"?
>
> We may want to also rename the existing of_graph_get_next_endpoint()
> function to of_graph_next_dev_endpoint() then. It would be a tree-wide
> patch, which is always annoying to get reviewed and merged, so if Rob
> would prefer avoiding the rename, I'm fine with that.
To be honest, from intuitive function naming point of view,
I prefer rename existing function name. But yes, it will be big patch.
Current of_graph_get_next_endpoint() will get next endpoint
beyond the port (A)
New function is not get next endpoint beyond the port (B)
Something like
(A) of_graph_get_next_endpoint() -> of_graph_get_next_port_endpoint()
(B) of_graph_get_next_endpoint()
> > > + * @port: pointer to the target port node
> > > + * @endpoint: current endpoint node, or NULL to get first
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: An 'endpoint' node pointer with refcount incremented. Refcount
> > > + * of the passed @prev node is decremented.
> > > + */
> >
> > It might be good to highlight here the difference to the
> > of_graph_get_next_endpoint().
>
> Yes, and the documentation of of_graph_get_next_endpoint() shoul also be
> improved.
Yes, Indeed.
Thank you for your help !!
Best regards
---
Renesas Electronics
Ph.D. Kuninori Morimoto
[Index of Archives]
[Pulseaudio]
[Linux Audio Users]
[ALSA Devel]
[Fedora Desktop]
[Fedora SELinux]
[Big List of Linux Books]
[Yosemite News]
[KDE Users]