Hi Marek,
On Sun, 2023-02-19 at 00:54 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> This particular block can have DT subnodes describing the LVDS LDB
> bridge. Instead of misusing simple-bus to scan for those nodes, do
> the scan within the driver.
>
> Fixes: 94e6197dadc9 ("arm64: dts: imx8mp: Add LCDIF2 & LDB nodes")
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> Cc: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Paul Elder <paul.elder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> drivers/soc/imx/imx8m-blk-ctrl.c | 11 +++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/imx/imx8m-blk-ctrl.c
> b/drivers/soc/imx/imx8m-blk-ctrl.c
> index 399cb85105a18..ab48f9dff4be5 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/imx/imx8m-blk-ctrl.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/imx/imx8m-blk-ctrl.c
> @@ -169,7 +169,9 @@ static int imx8m_blk_ctrl_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
> {
> const struct imx8m_blk_ctrl_data *bc_data;
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + struct platform_device *child;
> struct imx8m_blk_ctrl *bc;
> + struct device_node *np;
> void __iomem *base;
> int i, ret;
>
> @@ -310,6 +312,15 @@ static int imx8m_blk_ctrl_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
>
> dev_set_drvdata(dev, bc);
nit: I would put the below loop before dev_set_drvdata().
>
> + for_each_child_of_node(dev->of_node, np) {
Please call for_each_available_child_of_node() to create available
child devices only.
> + child = of_platform_device_create(np, NULL, dev);
> + if (!child)
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
-ENODEV is more appropriate?
> + of_node_put(np);
for_each_child_of_node() and for_each_available_child_node() would do
of_node_put() for you unless you break/return from the loop.
> + if (ret)
> + goto cleanup_provider;
Instead of return in case of creating child device failure, I would
give a warning message and continue to create other child devices if
any. So I would write:
-------------------------------8<-----------------------------------
for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, np) {
child = of_platform_device_create(np, NULL, dev);
if (!child)
dev_warn(dev, "failed to create device for
%pOF\n", child);
}
-------------------------------8<-----------------------------------
Even if return is used, dev_pm_genpd_remove_notifier() should be called
to bailout correctly.
Regards,
Liu Ying
> + }
> +
> return 0;
>
> cleanup_provider:
