21.04.2023 00:17, Linus Walleij пишет:
> The current code will, if we do not specify unique labels
> for the SRAM subnodes, fail to register several nodes named
> the same.
>
> Example:
>
> sram@40020000 {
> (...)
> sram@0 {
> (...)
> };
> sram@1000 {
> (...)
> };
> };
>
> Since the child->name in both cases will be "sram" the
> gen_pool_create() will fail because the name is not unique.
>
> Use dev_name() for the device as this will have bus ID
> set to the fully translated address for the node, and that
> will always be unique.
>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> ChangeLog v1->v2:
> - Stop complicating things and just use dev_name()
> ---
> drivers/misc/sram.c | 9 +++++----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/sram.c b/drivers/misc/sram.c
> index f0e7f02605eb..f80c3adddf0b 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/sram.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/sram.c
> @@ -240,10 +240,11 @@ static int sram_reserve_regions(struct sram_dev *sram, struct resource *res)
> goto err_chunks;
> }
> if (!label)
> - label = child->name;
> -
> - block->label = devm_kstrdup(sram->dev,
> - label, GFP_KERNEL);
> + block->label = devm_kasprintf(sram->dev, GFP_KERNEL,
> + "%s", dev_name(sram->dev));
This broke device-trees that have no label property. The SRAM DT binding
says:
"
label:
description:
The name for the reserved partition, if omitted, the label is taken
from the node name excluding the unit address.
"
Not sure whether breakage was on purpose, otherwise doc needs to be
updated or there should be explicit check for the duplicated node names.
Secondly, AFAICS, the dev_name(sram->dev) is the name of the parent SRAM
device and not of the children sub-nodes, hence it's now always the same
dev_name(sram->dev) for all sub-nodes.
