All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michal.simek@petalogix.com,
	microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node and of_devce.node
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:47:47 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100318154747.GA7767@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100318152250.21082.35352.stgit@angua>

Hi Grant,

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:22:50AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Both dev_archdata.of_node and of_device.node are duplications of the
> device.of_node value.  This patch removes them.

Yeah, they're plain duplications since you introduced dev.of_node.
I wonder what was the problem with using dev.archdata.of_node?
Why dev.of_node is better?

Also, by using dev.of_node directly you have to introduce ugly
#ifdefs in the non-OF code (as in i2c patch), which you don't
need with transparent archdata and accessors, which you've just
removed:

> -static inline void dev_archdata_set_node(struct dev_archdata *ad,
> -					 struct device_node *np)
> -{
> -	ad->of_node = np;
> -}
> -
> -static inline struct device_node *
> -dev_archdata_get_node(const struct dev_archdata *ad)
> -{
> -	return ad->of_node;
> -}

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michal.simek@petalogix.com,
	microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:47:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100318154747.GA7767@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100318152250.21082.35352.stgit@angua>

Hi Grant,

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:22:50AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Both dev_archdata.of_node and of_device.node are duplications of the
> device.of_node value.  This patch removes them.

Yeah, they're plain duplications since you introduced dev.of_node.
I wonder what was the problem with using dev.archdata.of_node?
Why dev.of_node is better?

Also, by using dev.of_node directly you have to introduce ugly
#ifdefs in the non-OF code (as in i2c patch), which you don't
need with transparent archdata and accessors, which you've just
removed:

> -static inline void dev_archdata_set_node(struct dev_archdata *ad,
> -					 struct device_node *np)
> -{
> -	ad->of_node = np;
> -}
> -
> -static inline struct device_node *
> -dev_archdata_get_node(const struct dev_archdata *ad)
> -{
> -	return ad->of_node;
> -}

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michal.simek@petalogix.com,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au
Subject: Re: [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node and of_devce.node
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:47:47 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100318154747.GA7767@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100318152250.21082.35352.stgit@angua>

Hi Grant,

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:22:50AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Both dev_archdata.of_node and of_device.node are duplications of the
> device.of_node value.  This patch removes them.

Yeah, they're plain duplications since you introduced dev.of_node.
I wonder what was the problem with using dev.archdata.of_node?
Why dev.of_node is better?

Also, by using dev.of_node directly you have to introduce ugly
#ifdefs in the non-OF code (as in i2c patch), which you don't
need with transparent archdata and accessors, which you've just
removed:

> -static inline void dev_archdata_set_node(struct dev_archdata *ad,
> -					 struct device_node *np)
> -{
> -	ad->of_node = np;
> -}
> -
> -static inline struct device_node *
> -dev_archdata_get_node(const struct dev_archdata *ad)
> -{
> -	return ad->of_node;
> -}

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2

  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-18 15:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-18 15:22 [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers in struct device Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers in Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 01/10] driver-core: Add device node pointer to struct device Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 02/10] i2c/of: Allow device node to be passed via i2c_board_info Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 02/10] i2c/of: Allow device node to be passed via Grant Likely
2010-04-27 18:19   ` [V2 PATCH 02/10] i2c/of: Allow device node to be passed via i2c_board_info Grant Likely
     [not found]     ` <s2sfa686aa41004271119m4ff1390eh405726d78de86d09-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-28 11:44       ` Jean Delvare
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 03/10] arch/sparc: Always use 'struct device.of_node' to get device node pointer Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 03/10] arch/sparc: Always use 'struct device.of_node' to Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 04/10] arch/powerpc: Always use 'struct device.of_node' to get device node pointer Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 04/10] arch/powerpc: Always use 'struct device.of_node' to Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 05/10] arch/microblaze: Always use 'struct device.of_node' to get device node pointer Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 05/10] arch/microblaze: Always use 'struct device.of_node' Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:58   ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Jochen Friedrich
2010-03-18 15:58     ` Jochen Friedrich
2010-03-18 15:58     ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node Jochen Friedrich
2010-03-18 16:24     ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Grant Likely
2010-03-18 16:24       ` Grant Likely
2010-03-18 16:24       ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to Grant Likely
2010-03-18 16:59   ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 16:59     ` Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 16:59     ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 17:07     ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Grant Likely
2010-03-18 17:07       ` Grant Likely
2010-03-18 17:07       ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to Grant Likely
2010-03-18 17:10       ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 17:10         ` Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 17:10         ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 17:12   ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node to get node pointer Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 17:12     ` Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 17:12     ` [V2 PATCH 06/10] of/drivers: Always use struct device.of_node Sean MacLennan
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 07/10] of: eliminate calls to dev_archdata_set_node() Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node and of_devce.node Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:47   ` Anton Vorontsov [this message]
2010-03-18 15:47     ` [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node and of_devce.node Anton Vorontsov
2010-03-18 15:47     ` [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete Anton Vorontsov
2010-03-18 16:22     ` [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node and of_devce.node Grant Likely
2010-03-18 16:22       ` Grant Likely
2010-03-18 16:22       ` [V2 PATCH 08/10] arch/powerpc: Remove obsolete Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22 ` [V2 PATCH 09/10] arch/microblaze: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.of_node and of_devce.node Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:22   ` [V2 PATCH 09/10] arch/microblaze: Remove obsolete Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:23 ` [V2 PATCH 10/10] arch/sparc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.prom_node and of_devce.node Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:23   ` [V2 PATCH 10/10] arch/sparc: Remove obsolete dev_archdata.prom_node Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:35 ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers in struct device Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:35   ` Grant Likely
2010-03-18 15:35   ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers Grant Likely
2010-03-23  6:57 ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers in struct device Michael Ellerman
2010-03-23  6:57   ` Michael Ellerman
2010-03-23  6:57   ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node Michael Ellerman
2010-03-23  7:06   ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers in struct device Grant Likely
2010-03-23  7:06     ` Grant Likely
2010-03-23  7:06     ` [V2 PATCH 00/10] of: Consolidate scattered device node pointers Grant Likely

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100318154747.GA7767@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru \
    --to=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=michal.simek@petalogix.com \
    --cc=microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.