From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED42DC2D0E5 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:37:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE406206E6 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:37:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727770AbgC0QhM (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 12:37:12 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:48572 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727726AbgC0QhM (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 12:37:12 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9D331B; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 09:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usa.arm.com (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E1FBA3F71F; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 09:37:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Sudeep Holla To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Peng Fan Cc: Sudeep Holla , f.fainelli@gmail.com, linux-imx@nxp.com Subject: [PATCH 4/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Drop checking for shmem property in parent node Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:36:54 +0000 Message-Id: <20200327163654.13389-5-sudeep.holla@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: <20200327163654.13389-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> References: <20200327163654.13389-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org The scmi protocol core driver checks for the channel availability before evaluating the shmem property. If the individual protocols don't have separate channel assigned to them, the channel alloted for the BASE protocol is reused automatically. Therefore there is no need to check for the shmem property in the parent node if it is absent in the child protocol node. Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla --- drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c index 5929c668dc1d..833e793b5391 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c @@ -60,8 +60,6 @@ static int smc_chan_setup(struct scmi_chan_info *cinfo, struct device *dev, return -ENOMEM; np = of_parse_phandle(cdev->of_node, "shmem", 0); - if (!np) - np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "shmem", 0); ret = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &res); of_node_put(np); if (ret) { -- 2.17.1