On 6/14/2014 8:00 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Pantelis Antoniou reports that of_find_node_by_path() is borked because >>>> of_allnodes is not guaranteed to contain the root of the tree after using >>>> any of the dynamic update functions because some other nodes ends up as >>>> of_allnodes. >>>> >>>> Fixes: c22e650e66b8 of: Make of_find_node_by_path() handle /aliases >>> >>> Is it not possible to do a fix in of_find_node_by_path instead? I just >>> wonder if this could have any other unintended side-effects on >>> of_attach_node's behavior. >> >> Given that I'm going to replace the custom list with list_head which >> makes this problem go away, I think this solution is fine. >> >> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> > > That said, the following might be better because it would guarantee > that children always appear after parents... < snip > I agree, I like that better. Patch respun, v2 will be sent as a reply to this email. Pantelis, can you test v2 please? Thanks, Frank -- 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
