> Perhaps a more specific subject.
I can just specify stub function names in the subject.
Is this enough?
> On 06/17/2013 12:24 PM, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> > Patch adds of_get_next_child and of_get_next_available_child
> > stubs for non-OF builds.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
>
> What changed for v2?
v1 not contain "inline" for prototypes.
> > include/linux/of.h | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h
> > index 1fd08ca..df0e644 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/of.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> > @@ -366,8 +366,17 @@ static inline bool of_have_populated_dt(void)
> > return false;
> > }
> >
> > -#define for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \
> > - while (0)
> > +static struct device_node *of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node,
> > + struct device_node *prev)
> > +{
> > + return NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct device_node *of_get_next_available_child(
> > + const struct device_node *node, struct device_node *prev)
> > +{
> > + return NULL;
> > +}
> >
> > static inline struct device_node *of_get_child_by_name(
> > const struct device_node *node,
> > @@ -376,6 +385,9 @@ static inline struct device_node *of_get_child_by_name(
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > +#define for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \
>
> parent and child need unused annotations to avoid unused variable warnings.
This define has been moved just for keep same order as for OF-version.
---
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��W����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
