Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] property: Add device_get_child_node_count_named()

Matti Vaittinen
2025-02-25T10:52:12Z

On 25/02/2025 12:39, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 12:29:31PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>> On 25/02/2025 12:21, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 11:40:16AM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * device_get_child_node_count_named - number of child nodes with given name
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * Scan device's child nodes and find all the nodes with a specific name and
>>>>> + * return the number of found nodes. Potential '@number' -ending for scanned
>>>>> + * names is ignored. Eg,
>>>>> + * device_get_child_node_count(dev, "channel");
>>>>> + * would match all the nodes:
>>>>> + * channel { }, channel@0 {}, channel@0xabba {}...
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * @dev: Device to count the child nodes for

...

>>>> I did not check how many users are you proposing for this, but if
>>>> there's only one, then IMO this should not be a global function yet.
>>>> It just feels to special case to me. But let's see what the others
>>>> think.
>>>
>>> The problem is that if somebody hides it, we might potentially see
>>> a duplication in the future. So I _slightly_ prefer to publish and
>>> then drop that after a few cycles if no users appear.
>>
>> After taking a very quick grep I spotted one other existing place where we
>> might be able to do direct conversion to use this function.
>>
>> drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
>>
>> That'd be 2 users.
>
> I haven't checked myself, I believe your judgement, but can you add a (rfc?)
> patch at the end of this series to show that? With the luckily event of acking
> by the network people we may have it already done.

Sure. I can add a patch to gianfar when sending the v5 - if this new
function is not completely NACK'd before that :)

Yours,
-- Matti