On 09/08/2019 06:46, Vinod Koul wrote:
+int sdw_of_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus)
+{
+ struct device *dev = bus->dev;
+ struct device_node *node;
+
+ for_each_child_of_node(bus->dev->of_node, node) {
+ struct sdw_slave_id id;
+ const char *compat = NULL;
+ int unique_id, ret;
+ int ver, mfg_id, part_id, class_id;
+
+ compat = of_get_property(node, "compatible", NULL);
+ if (!compat)
+ continue;
+
+ ret = sscanf(compat, "sdw%x,%x,%x,%x",
+ &ver, &mfg_id, &part_id, &class_id);
+ if (ret != 4) {
+ dev_err(dev, "Manf ID & Product code not found %s\n",
+ compat);
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "sdw-instance-id", &unique_id);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(dev, "Instance id not found:%d\n", ret);
+ continue;
I am confused here.
If you have two identical devices on the same link, isn't this property
required and that should be a real error instead of a continue?
Yes, I agree it will be mandatory in such cases.
Am okay either way, I dont mind changing it to returning EINVAL in all the
cases.
Do we want to abort? We are in loop scanning for devices so makes sense
if we do not do that and continue to check next one..
That was my inital plan.
Pierre suggested a better compatible to include instance ID and LinkID
so this check would be part of the check one before this line.
--srini
