Hi Laurent, Tomi Thank you for your review > > > +/** > > > + * of_graph_get_next_endpoint_raw() - get next endpoint node > > > > How about "of_graph_get_next_port_endpoint()"? > > We may want to also rename the existing of_graph_get_next_endpoint() > function to of_graph_next_dev_endpoint() then. It would be a tree-wide > patch, which is always annoying to get reviewed and merged, so if Rob > would prefer avoiding the rename, I'm fine with that. To be honest, from intuitive function naming point of view, I prefer rename existing function name. But yes, it will be big patch. Current of_graph_get_next_endpoint() will get next endpoint beyond the port (A) New function is not get next endpoint beyond the port (B) Something like (A) of_graph_get_next_endpoint() -> of_graph_get_next_port_endpoint() (B) of_graph_get_next_endpoint() > > > + * @port: pointer to the target port node > > > + * @endpoint: current endpoint node, or NULL to get first > > > + * > > > + * Return: An 'endpoint' node pointer with refcount incremented. Refcount > > > + * of the passed @prev node is decremented. > > > + */ > > > > It might be good to highlight here the difference to the > > of_graph_get_next_endpoint(). > > Yes, and the documentation of of_graph_get_next_endpoint() shoul also be > improved. Yes, Indeed. Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Renesas Electronics Ph.D. Kuninori Morimoto
