From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B5A834BA41; Mon, 29 Sep 2025 09:12:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759137125; cv=none; b=cDRoc/LdALRi+9KoAWJo0lxIylP7Y6oixzKL6TPnED5hL0m9nUWf04L3foEDZwq4e1nzO1QtXJuyhxqgt3Mhbd9583H+VCWw3yM2aSe5Vsfqzv/XViXzPl2+GOla3zVIa845mx9CX9HjLN/DHIKsv/gQv+6rsRVljJr+V4khWcg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759137125; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pzjgHw1TRVEzQipbuD6sdMwfcVRo6nvQqjOx0CUKQzM=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=L2S+Jrz7G1xVhaiWTxbSnvrnrhQt91rgordP0Cb91zO8+kkunzhoyirDDyyjC1nGRAmbaoh7JirOVfaFJZHoAcg41VaV0uy2OsqffagpYUoiedK3geI+PXkopezR5vheu/Dy/OirdPcKR80HscHQGt3GqMihiLAY7zPaLoSAUHw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.31]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4cZwNS5dd8z6M4jd; Mon, 29 Sep 2025 17:08:56 +0800 (CST) Received: from dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.146.113]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E05CE1402F5; Mon, 29 Sep 2025 17:12:01 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.47.64.220) by dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Mon, 29 Sep 2025 10:12:00 +0100 Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2025 10:11:58 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Sakari Ailus CC: , , , , , , , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Len Brown" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Danilo Krummrich , Andy Shevchenko , Daniel Scally , Heikki Krogerus , Javier Carrasco , Dmitry Torokhov , Lee Jones , Pavel Machek , Matthias Fend , Chanwoo Choi , Krzysztof Kozlowski , "Laurent Pinchart" , Paul Elder , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Horatiu Vultur , , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , "Jakub Kicinski" , Paolo Abeni , Mark Brown , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/16] ACPI: property: Use ACPI functions in acpi_graph_get_next_endpoint() only Message-ID: <20250929101158.00000709@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20250924074602.266292-3-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> References: <20250924074602.266292-1-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> <20250924074602.266292-3-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100009.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.83) To dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 10:45:48 +0300 Sakari Ailus wrote: > Calling fwnode_get_next_child_node() in ACPI implementation of the fwnode > property API is somewhat problematic as the latter is used in the > impelementation of the former. Instead of using > fwnode_get_next_child_node() in acpi_graph_get_next_endpoint(), call > acpi_get_next_subnode() directly instead. > > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus Makes sense to me on simply basis of making reasoning about it a little simpler. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron