| Message ID | 20200609201555.11401-3-eajames@linux.ibm.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 58031a26bf2b0c458511df146143c78ab569f4da |
| Headers | show |
| Series | i2c: fsi: Fixes for systems with more ports | expand |
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 03:15:55PM -0500, Eddie James wrote: > Ports should be defined in the devicetree if they are to be enabled on > the system. The patch description does not really fit anymore, does it? There is no change in behaviour, we just remove a redundant check. > > Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> > --- > Changes since v1: > - Remove the check for null device node since that is checked in > of_device_is_available > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c > index 977d6f524649..10332693edf0 100644 > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c > @@ -703,7 +703,7 @@ static int fsi_i2c_probe(struct device *dev) > > for (port_no = 0; port_no < ports; port_no++) { > np = fsi_i2c_find_port_of_node(dev->of_node, port_no); > - if (np && !of_device_is_available(np)) > + if (!of_device_is_available(np)) > continue; > > port = kzalloc(sizeof(*port), GFP_KERNEL); > -- > 2.24.0 >
On 7/4/20 1:39 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 03:15:55PM -0500, Eddie James wrote: >> Ports should be defined in the devicetree if they are to be enabled on >> the system. > The patch description does not really fit anymore, does it? There is no > change in behaviour, we just remove a redundant check. Hi, it does change the behavior actually. By checking for the device node pointer, it would proceed and create the port for a NULL device node, which is not the desired behavior. Thanks, Eddie > >> Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> >> Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> >> --- >> Changes since v1: >> - Remove the check for null device node since that is checked in >> of_device_is_available >> >> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c >> index 977d6f524649..10332693edf0 100644 >> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c >> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c >> @@ -703,7 +703,7 @@ static int fsi_i2c_probe(struct device *dev) >> >> for (port_no = 0; port_no < ports; port_no++) { >> np = fsi_i2c_find_port_of_node(dev->of_node, port_no); >> - if (np && !of_device_is_available(np)) >> + if (!of_device_is_available(np)) >> continue; >> >> port = kzalloc(sizeof(*port), GFP_KERNEL); >> -- >> 2.24.0 >>
> Hi, it does change the behavior actually. By checking for the device node > pointer, it would proceed and create the port for a NULL device node, which > is not the desired behavior. Brown paper bag, please...
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 03:15:55PM -0500, Eddie James wrote: > Ports should be defined in the devicetree if they are to be enabled on > the system. > > Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> Applied to for-next, thanks!
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c index 977d6f524649..10332693edf0 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c @@ -703,7 +703,7 @@ static int fsi_i2c_probe(struct device *dev) for (port_no = 0; port_no < ports; port_no++) { np = fsi_i2c_find_port_of_node(dev->of_node, port_no); - if (np && !of_device_is_available(np)) + if (!of_device_is_available(np)) continue; port = kzalloc(sizeof(*port), GFP_KERNEL);