On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Thu 05 May 06:29 PDT 2016, Lee Jones wrote: > > Lee, > > I ran into this topic again while looking into some unrelated things. > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c > > +struct rproc *of_rproc_byindex(struct device_node *np, int index) > > +{ > > + struct rproc *rproc; > > + struct device_node *rproc_node; > > + struct platform_device *pdev; > > + struct klist_iter i; > > + > > + if (index < 0) > > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > + > > + rproc_node = of_parse_phandle(np, "rprocs", index); > > + if (!rproc_node) > > As I stated before I would like for you to use the existing rproc_list, > as done in rproc_get_by_phandle() today. > > But as you resend this patch, could you please make this check fallback > to also checking for "ti,rproc", then simply drop the existing > rproc_get_by_phandle() and change the call to > of_rproc_byindex(dev->of_node, 0) in wkup_m3_ipc.c? > > That way we're backwards compatible with the TI wakeup M3, without > having to maintain the then non-standard generic rproc phandle resolver. I started working on this yesterday. Should be with you soon. > > + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV); > > + > > + pdev = of_find_device_by_node(rproc_node); > > + if (!pdev) > > + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV); > > + > > + klist_iter_init(&rprocs, &i); > > + while ((rproc = next_rproc(&i)) != NULL) > > + if (rproc->dev.parent == &pdev->dev) > > + break; > > + klist_iter_exit(&i); > > + > > + return rproc; > > +} > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_rproc_byindex); > > Regards, > Bjorn -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html