On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:39:22 +0400, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@xxxxxxx> 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>
> ---
> 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..c086c1a 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 inline struct device_node *of_get_next_child(
> + const struct device_node *node, struct device_node *prev)
> +{
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static inline 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) \
> + while (0)
> +
Why is the for_each_child_of_node() getting moved?
g.
> static inline int of_get_child_count(const struct device_node *np)
> {
> return 0;
> --
> 1.8.1.5
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-leds" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
