* checking status semantics with compatible functions
@ 2011-03-30 8:07 Kumar Gala
[not found] ` <9BC4C90E-090F-4961-A242-10D769C08738-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Gala @ 2011-03-30 8:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Grant Likely
Cc: devicetree-discuss, linuxppc-dev-50dRxjG7WBCY5r8RbUyfqNHuzzzSOjJt,
Prabhakar Kushwaha
Grant,
We have a few helper functions like:
drivers/of/base.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_device_is_compatible);
drivers/of/base.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_find_compatible_node);
That we use in places like arch/powerpc/platform/85xx/mpc85xx_ds.c:
for_each_node_by_type(np, "pci") {
if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8540-pci") ||
of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8548-pcie") ||
of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-pcie")) {
It seems like we should check 'status' in these cases with 'of_device_is_available'. I'm thinking that we should have versions of the helpers that also do the 'of_device_is_available' checking. Or should we just change the helpers to call of_device_is_available?
- k
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread[parent not found: <9BC4C90E-090F-4961-A242-10D769C08738-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: checking status semantics with compatible functions [not found] ` <9BC4C90E-090F-4961-A242-10D769C08738-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org> @ 2011-03-30 8:26 ` Kumar Gala 2011-03-30 14:31 ` Grant Likely 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Kumar Gala @ 2011-03-30 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kumar Gala; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev list, devicetree-discuss, Prabhakar Kushwaha [Adding proper lists on CC] - k On Mar 30, 2011, at 3:07 AM, Kumar Gala wrote: > Grant, > > We have a few helper functions like: > > drivers/of/base.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_device_is_compatible); > drivers/of/base.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_find_compatible_node); > > That we use in places like arch/powerpc/platform/85xx/mpc85xx_ds.c: > > for_each_node_by_type(np, "pci") { > if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8540-pci") || > of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8548-pcie") || > of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-pcie")) { > > It seems like we should check 'status' in these cases with 'of_device_is_available'. I'm thinking that we should have versions of the helpers that also do the 'of_device_is_available' checking. Or should we just change the helpers to call of_device_is_available? > > - k > _______________________________________________ > devicetree-discuss mailing list > devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: checking status semantics with compatible functions 2011-03-30 8:26 ` Kumar Gala @ 2011-03-30 14:31 ` Grant Likely [not found] ` <20110330143113.GA13685-e0URQFbLeQY2iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Grant Likely @ 2011-03-30 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kumar Gala; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev list, devicetree-discuss, Prabhakar Kushwaha On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:26:29AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > [Adding proper lists on CC] > > - k > > On Mar 30, 2011, at 3:07 AM, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > Grant, > > > > We have a few helper functions like: > > > > drivers/of/base.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_device_is_compatible); > > drivers/of/base.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_find_compatible_node); > > > > That we use in places like arch/powerpc/platform/85xx/mpc85xx_ds.c: > > > > for_each_node_by_type(np, "pci") { > > if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8540-pci") || > > of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8548-pcie") || > > of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-pcie")) { > > > > It seems like we should check 'status' in these cases with > > 'of_device_is_available'. I'm thinking that we should have > > versions of the helpers that also do the 'of_device_is_available' > > checking. Or should we just change the helpers to call > > of_device_is_available? Yes, of_device_is_available() should be checked, but it should not be added directly to of_device_is_compatible(). I'm okay with adding a helper variant that does the of_device_is_compatible() check. In that particular case, I'd also suggest using for_each_matching_node(). g. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20110330143113.GA13685-e0URQFbLeQY2iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: checking status semantics with compatible functions [not found] ` <20110330143113.GA13685-e0URQFbLeQY2iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> @ 2011-04-05 11:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2011-04-05 11:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Likely; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev list, devicetree-discuss, Prabhakar Kushwaha On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 08:31 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > Yes, of_device_is_available() should be checked, but it should not be > added directly to of_device_is_compatible(). I'm okay with adding > a helper variant that does the of_device_is_compatible() check. > > In that particular case, I'd also suggest using > for_each_matching_node(). Agreed. A device might be unavailable due to how FW configured the machine, but made later on available by the kernel, that shouldn't impact the interface compatibility test. Cheers, Ben. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-04-05 11:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-30 8:07 checking status semantics with compatible functions Kumar Gala
[not found] ` <9BC4C90E-090F-4961-A242-10D769C08738-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>
2011-03-30 8:26 ` Kumar Gala
2011-03-30 14:31 ` Grant Likely
[not found] ` <20110330143113.GA13685-e0URQFbLeQY2iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org>
2011-04-05 11:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox