On 11/25/2013 08:29 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
Hello Daniel,
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 10:28:15PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
On 11/22/2013 08:22 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 05:31:46PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
On 11/22/2013 05:16 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 12:49:48AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
Yes. Sounds like I missed it.
This regression has been introduced by:
commit 326e31eebe61dc838e031ea16968b2cfb43443e3
Author: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue Oct 1 11:00:53 2013 +0200
clocksource: Put nodes passed to CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE
callbacks centrally
Instead of letting each driver call of_node_put do it centrally in the
loop that also calls the CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE callbacks. This is less
prone to error and also moves getting and putting the references
into the
same function.
Consequently all respective of_node_put calls in drivers are removed.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: David Brown <davidb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Still all but the hook in clocksource_of_init of this commit was
correct, right? (Well, but this buggy hunk makes the commit log wrong.)
I don't understand your comment, can you elaborate ?
My patch added an of_node_put in clocksource_of_init and dropped several
of_node_puts in drivers. This thread is about the first being wrong. My
question was if dropping the others was correct.
Yes, Thierry's patch removes the of_node_puts but I am also wondering if
we shouldn't just revert the patch 326e31eebe61dc838e instead.
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
