On 2024/12/6 15:21, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 08:10:13AM +0800, Zijun Hu wrote: >> From: Zijun Hu <quic_zijuhu@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Constify the following API: >> struct device *device_find_child(struct device *dev, void *data, >> int (*match)(struct device *dev, void *data)); >> To : >> struct device *device_find_child(struct device *dev, const void *data, >> device_match_t match); >> typedef int (*device_match_t)(struct device *dev, const void *data); >> with the following reasons: >> >> - Protect caller's match data @*data which is for comparison and lookup >> and the API does not actually need to modify @*data. >> >> - Make the API's parameters (@match)() and @data have the same type as >> all of other device finding APIs (bus|class|driver)_find_device(). >> >> - All kinds of existing device match functions can be directly taken >> as the API's argument, they were exported by driver core. >> >> Constify the API and adapt for various existing usages by simply making >> various match functions take 'const void *' as type of match data @data. > > With the discussion that a new name would ease the conversion, maybe > consider device_find_child_device() to also align the name (somewhat) to > the above mentioned (bus|class|driver)_find_device()? > i finally select this squashing method after considerations as shown by link below: https://lore.kernel.org/all/3a4de1bb-3eb2-469a-8ff7-ff706804f5bb@xxxxxxxxxx device_find_child() is consist with existing device_find_child_by_name() and device_find_any_child, device's child is also a device, so we may not need the tail _device(). > Do you have a merge plan already? I guess this patch will go through > Greg's driver core tree? > this patch series is already squashing solution. yes. hope it move toward mainline by Greg's driver core tree. (^^)(^^) > Best regards > Uwe
