On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 09:03:38AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 11/21/2012 05:52 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:48:43PM +0100, Steffen Trumtrar wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:12:43AM +0000, Manjunathappa, Prakash wrote:
> >>> Hi Steffen,
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 21:24:52, Steffen Trumtrar wrote:
> >>>> +/**
> >>>> + * of_get_display_timings - parse all display_timing entries from a device_node
> >>>> + * @np: device_node with the subnodes
> >>>> + **/
> >>>> +struct display_timings *of_get_display_timings(const struct device_node *np)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct device_node *timings_np;
> >>>> + struct device_node *entry;
> >>>> + struct device_node *native_mode;
> >>>> + struct display_timings *disp;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!np) {
> >>>> + pr_err("%s: no devicenode given\n", __func__);
> >>>> + return NULL;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + timings_np = of_find_node_by_name(np, "display-timings");
> >>>
> >>> I get below build warnings on this line
> >>> drivers/video/of_display_timing.c: In function 'of_get_display_timings':
> >>> drivers/video/of_display_timing.c:109:2: warning: passing argument 1 of 'of_find_node_by_name' discards qualifiers from pointer target type
> >>> include/linux/of.h:167:28: note: expected 'struct device_node *' but argument is of type 'const struct device_node *'
> >>>
> >>>> + * of_display_timings_exists - check if a display-timings node is provided
> >>>> + * @np: device_node with the timing
> >>>> + **/
> >>>> +int of_display_timings_exists(const struct device_node *np)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct device_node *timings_np;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!np)
> >>>> + return -EINVAL;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + timings_np = of_parse_phandle(np, "display-timings", 0);
> >>>
> >>> Also here:
> >>> drivers/video/of_display_timing.c: In function 'of_display_timings_exists':
> >>> drivers/video/of_display_timing.c:209:2: warning: passing argument 1 of 'of_parse_phandle' discards qualifiers from pointer target type
> >>> include/linux/of.h:258:28: note: expected 'struct device_node *' but argument is of type 'const struct device_node *'
> >>>
> >>
> >> The warnings are because the of-functions do not use const pointers where they
> >> should. I had two options: don't use const pointers even if they should be and
> >> have no warnings or use const pointers and have a correct API. (Third option:
> >> send patches for of-functions). I chose the second option.
> >
> > Maybe a better approach would be a combination of 1 and 3: don't use
> > const pointers for struct device_node for now and bring the issue up
> > with the OF maintainers, possibly with patches attached that fix the
> > problematic functions.
>
> Why does this need to be const? Since some DT functions increment
> refcount the node, I'm not sure that making struct device_node const in
> general is right thing to do. I do think it should be okay for
> of_parse_phandle.
I wasn't proposing to do it everywhere but only where possible. If the
node is modified in some way then obviously it shouldn't be const.
Thierry
Attachment:
pgplXg25iH4G0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
