On 06/18/2013 10:29 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 07:29:58PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
This imports of_get_parent, of_get_next_child, of_get_next_available_child,
and of_get_child_by_name and corresponding helpers from Linux OF API.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth<sebastian.hesselbarth@xxxxxxxxx>
---
[...]
+#define for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \
+ for (child = of_get_next_child(parent, NULL); child != NULL; \
+ child = of_get_next_child(parent, child))
Why don't we just rename the original list iteration #define?
I think we shouldn't generate worse code just for the sake of being in
sync with Linux.
Agree, reworking this will take some days as I will not be able to
get back to it soon. Rebasing that 22 patches beast is time-consuming ;)
I wonder why the Linux implementation doesn't use the Linux list
implementation...
Maybe you should also raise that question on devtree-discuss?
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
