Re: [PATCH 08/20] pinctrl: Assume map table entries can't have a NULL name field

[Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@freescale.com>]

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 08:39:58AM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> Dong Aisheng wrote at Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:48 PM:
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 07:53:44PM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> ...
> > > I'm hoping that we don't do this internal conversion. The rules I'd like are:
> ...
> > > * Every mapping table entry must include a non-NULL name field.
> > >
> > > * Every call to pinctrl_get()/pinctrl_lookup_state() must pass a non-NULL name
> >
> > This is a way.
> > 
> > Before using this, i'm  still wondering what big problems do you think for us to support
> > a NULL map name?
> > Because the name for devices do not have different state really does not make too much
> > sense but extra overhead.
> 
> If we disallow NULL names, it simplifies the code in the pinctrl core;
> when registering mappings or right at the start of pinctrl_get() or
> pinctrl_lookup_state(), we check if the name is NULL and if so error out.
> Everywhere else can then assume name!=NULL, and hence not have special-
> cases for name==NULL, e.g.:
> 
> In debug code:
> name ? name : "(unnamed)"
> vs.:
> name
> 
> When matching mapping table entries:
> match = !name ? !map->name : !strcmp(name, map->name)
> vs.:
> match = !strcmp(name, map->name)
> 
> Similar for the body of pinctrl_lookup_state().
> 
Yes, it does make thing simple.
But i guess it's not the key point to not support NULL state name, right?

> Equally, it's not possible to generate a mapping table entry with a NULL
> name from device tree given the bindings we discussed, so disallowing them
> everywhere keeps things consistent.
> 
Yes, i'm wondering if we can change it a bit to support NULL name.
I replied with my idea in another mail before this one.

Regards
Dong Aisheng