On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Jun 2014 12:48:54 -0500, Rob Herring <rob.herring@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> > There are a bunch of users open coding the for_each_node_by_name() by
>>> > calling of_find_node_by_name() directly instead of using the macro. This
>>> > is getting in the way of some cleanups, and the possibility of removing
>>> > of_find_node_by_name() entirely. Clean it up so that all the users are
>>> > consistent.
>>> >
>>> > Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > ---
>>> > arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c | 20 +++++---------------
>>> > arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/pci.c | 2 +-
>>> > arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/smp.c | 2 +-
>>> > arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/udbg_adb.c | 2 +-
>>> > arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c | 3 +--
>>> > drivers/cpufreq/pmac64-cpufreq.c | 3 +--
>>> > drivers/edac/cell_edac.c | 3 +--
>>> > drivers/pci/hotplug/rpaphp_core.c | 4 ++--
>>> > drivers/tty/serial/pmac_zilog.c | 9 +++------
>>> > sound/ppc/pmac.c | 6 +++---
>>> > 10 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>>> >
>>> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c
>>> > index 63d82bbc05e9..39e1d163c427 100644
>>> > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c
>>> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c
>>> > @@ -2805,25 +2805,20 @@ set_initial_features(void)
>>> > /* Enable GMAC for now for PCI probing. It will be disabled
>>> > * later on after PCI probe
>>> > */
>>> > - np = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "ethernet");
>>> > - while(np) {
>>> > + for_each_node_by_name(np, "ethernet")
>>> > if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "K2-GMAC"))
>>>
>>> Can't for_each_compatible_node be used here instead?
>>
>> Not easily without changing the behaviour. It would need to then check
>> the name inside the block.
>
> Why would it change behavior? If the compatible string matches, do you
> really have cases where the node name is not "ethernet"? I don't
> believe it's the kernel's job to validate DT bindings.
Yes, there are actually some bindings that have the same compatible
property but behaviour changes based on node name! I don't want to do
the legwork to figure out if these are in that group. Someone else can
do that job.
g.
--
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
