On 16/08/2022 13:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/08/2022 07:34, Samuel Holland wrote:
>> Now that a "regulators" child is accepted by the controller binding, the
>> debugfs show routine must be explicitly limited to "sram" children.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> (no changes since v2)
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - New patch for v2
>>
>> drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c
>> index 92f9186c1c42..6acaaeb65652 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c
>> @@ -120,6 +120,9 @@ static int sunxi_sram_show(struct seq_file *s, void *data)
>> seq_puts(s, "--------------------\n\n");
>>
>> for_each_child_of_node(sram_dev->of_node, sram_node) {
>> + if (!of_node_name_eq(sram_node, "sram"))
>
> You should not rely on node names. They can change in DTS. Why do you
> need to test for the name?
>
Ah, it is not a device node but a child property, right? In such case,
it's of course fine.
The device node names could change and should not be considered ABI (at
least I hope should not...).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
