On 09/02/14 08:45, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> I came down to this. Could you review? Is that
> implementation closer to the suggestion made by you.
I like this patch (but I'm biased because I want it to exist). Feel free
to add my Tested-by.
> ---
> drivers/of/address.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/of/platform.c | 20 ++++++++++++++---
> include/linux/of_address.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/address.c b/drivers/of/address.c
> index e371825..86c2166 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/address.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/address.c
> @@ -601,6 +601,32 @@ const __be32 *of_get_address(struct device_node *dev, int index, u64 *size,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_get_address);
>
> +const __be32 *of_get_localbus_address(struct device_node *np, int index,
> + u64 *size)
> +{
> + struct device_node *root, *parent;
> + const __be32 *ranges, *prop = NULL;
> +
> + parent = of_get_parent(np);
> + if (!parent)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + root = of_find_node_by_path("/");
> +
> + if (parent == root) {
> + of_node_put(parent);
> + return NULL;
> + }
I don't get this part though. Perhaps it needs a comment to say why we
don't allow the node to live in the root.
> +
> + ranges = of_get_property(parent, "ranges", NULL);
> + of_node_put(parent);
> +
> + if (!ranges)
> + prop = of_get_address(np, index, size, NULL);
> +
> + return prop;
> +}
> +
>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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
