From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp126.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp126.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.65.185]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F0B73DDFEB for ; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 07:38:28 +1100 (EST) From: David Brownell To: Anton Vorontsov Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] of/gpio: implement of_dev_gpiochip_{add, remove} calls Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:25:01 -0700 References: <20081016171222.GA24812@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20081016171303.GE5515@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> In-Reply-To: <20081016171303.GE5515@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200810171325.01729.david-b@pacbell.net> Cc: David Brownell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, i2c@lm-sensors.org, Jean Delvare , David Miller List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thursday 16 October 2008, Anton Vorontsov wrote: > +       if (of_gc->chip) > +               return of_gc->chip; > +       return &of_gc->gc; presumably there's a reason not to of_gc->chip = &of_gc->gc; when this gets set up, so this can always be a simple return of_gc->chip; (and inlined)? Needlessly complex...