On Thursday, February 1, 2018 1:24:53 PM CET Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 08:27 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:17 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > On 1/31/2018 4:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > As well as its sibling of_device_get_match_data() has no such > > > > checks, > > > > no need to do it in acpi_get_match_data(). > > > > > > > > First of all, we are not supposed to call fwnode API like this > > > > without > > > > driver attached. > > > > > > > > Second, if pure OF driver calls this function, it's weird to have > > > > ACPI > > > > companion without ACPI ID in this case. > > > > > > We talked about this during review. > > > > > > of_match_device() does all the checking for the OF part. ACPI > > > doesn't have > > > any checks. > > > > Yeah, this patch is just plain incorrect AFAICS. > > I don't see how check dev->driver is implemented on OF side then > > > of_device_get_match_data() which is called by > of_fwnode_device_get_match_data() has dereferenced dev->driver w/o any > check. > > I can't agree that the patch is plain incorrect, if I didn't miss > anything. OK, you're right, sorry. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
