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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 EF9E0C433DF for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 05:42:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FCF822248 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 05:42:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728015AbgJOFmt (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 01:42:49 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:59172 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727397AbgJOFmt (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 01:42:49 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id B4D9068BEB; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 07:42:44 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 07:42:44 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Nicolas Saenz Julienne Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, hch@lst.de, ardb@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frank Rowand , robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jeremy.linton@arm.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] of/address: Introduce of_dma_get_max_cpu_address() Message-ID: <20201015054244.GD12218@lst.de> References: <20201014191211.27029-1-nsaenzjulienne@suse.de> <20201014191211.27029-4-nsaenzjulienne@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201014191211.27029-4-nsaenzjulienne@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > +phys_addr_t __init of_dma_get_max_cpu_address(struct device_node *np) > +{ > + phys_addr_t max_cpu_addr = PHYS_ADDR_MAX; > + struct of_range_parser parser; > + phys_addr_t subtree_max_addr; > + struct device_node *child; > + phys_addr_t cpu_end = 0; > + struct of_range range; > + const __be32 *ranges; > + int len; > + > + if (!np) > + np = of_root; Requiring of_root to be passed explicitly would seem more natural to me than the magic NULL argument. There doesn't seem to be any precedent for that kind of calling convention either.