From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35303)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1SpEYw-0007yw-9O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 04:15:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1SpEYq-0008R7-9j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 04:15:50 -0400
Received: from mail-bk0-f45.google.com ([209.85.214.45]:65134)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1SpEYq-0008Qv-3K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 04:15:44 -0400
Received: by bkcji1 with SMTP id ji1so1532005bkc.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 01:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEgOgz7sjt-zBvjGtAyJJTKDETRnWPpuv+2_XUzo__-09ZMuZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1341927136-30762-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
	<CAEgOgz7sjt-zBvjGtAyJJTKDETRnWPpuv+2_XUzo__-09ZMuZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:15:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-EU-N6ZVJnpmocwkTCQtv38nPMiJPmsbsOG0Sttr0nBw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] device_tree: Add support for reading
	device tree properties
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@petalogix.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, patches@linaro.org

On 12 July 2012 01:45, Peter Crosthwaite
<peter.crosthwaite@petalogix.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I still think that having this new function is misguided:
>>  * nobody's using it
>
> I wasn't thinking a new dead function. I was suggesting that the one
> function you originally proposed was generalised to handle non zero
> offsets. Only a small change to what you originally had. Lets not
> think about this now though, as its not worth blocking your series
> over dead code.

Thanks; I appreciate the pragmatism. Do you want to add a
reviewed-by: tag to my v1 patch, then, or was there something
else that I need to change in it?

> Ill fix incrementally when the time comes for me to
> push my own dtb work that needs this functionality. But having to
> query the whole DTB cell array to get a single property will make a
> mess of my code.

Mmm. It'll probably be easier to assess the new/changed API
in the context of something using it anyway.

thanks
-- PMM