Re: [PATCH V2 3/6] pinctrl: core device tree mapping table parsingsupport

[Stephen Warren]

On 03/21/2012 09:48 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 01:31 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 01:44:36AM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
...
>>> +int pinctrl_dt_to_map(struct pinctrl *p)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct device_node *np = p->dev->of_node;
>>> +	int state, ret;
>>> +	char *propname;
>>> +	struct property *prop;
>>> +	const char *statename;
>>> +	const __be32 *list;
>>> +	int size, config;
>>> +	phandle phandle;
>>> +	struct device_node *np_config;
>>> +	struct pinctrl_dt_map *dt_map;
>>
>> Add NULL np checking?
> 
> Oops yes. I though I had that somewhere, but evidently not...

It turns out this isn't needed; of_node_get() and of_find_property()
both handle a NULL np just fine. Still, I suppose this might not always
be true for arbitrary code that's in pinctrl_dt_to_map(), so perhaps we
should add this anyway.

>>> +		}
>>> +
>>> +		/* For every referenced pin configuration node in it */
>>> +		for (config = 0; config < size; config++) {
>>> +			phandle = be32_to_cpup(list++);
>>> +
>>> +			/* Look up the pin configuration node */
>>> +			np_config = of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle);
>>
>> One option is using of_parse_phandle, then we do not need calculate
>> the phandle offset by ourselves.
>> Like:
>> np_config = of_parse_phandle(propname , config);
> 
> Yes, that's a good idea. I'll try that.

I looked at this more, and the existing code is a lot more efficient;
of_parse_phandle() internally calls of_find_property() each time, which
this pinctrl code has already done. I'd rather just leave this as it is.
Are you OK with that?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/