Patchwork [33/37] sound/soc: use .dev.of_node instead of .node in struct of_device

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Grant Likely
Date March 11, 2010, 6:06 p.m.
Message ID <20100311180649.4824.10368.stgit@angua>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/47405/
State Not Applicable
Delegated to: David Miller
Headers show

Comments

Grant Likely - March 11, 2010, 6:06 p.m.
.node is being removed

Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
---

 sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Mark Brown - March 11, 2010, 7:34 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:06:50AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> .node is being removed
> 
> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>

Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>

but please ensure that Liam and especially Timur also check this (both
CCed).

For enormous patch serieses like this it's really nice if you can ensure
that each person is only CCed on the patches that they need to review.
Much less stuff in the inbox.

> ---
> 
>  sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
> index ef67d1c..d7e1b9a 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
> @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static struct snd_soc_ops mpc8610_hpcd_ops = {
>  static int mpc8610_hpcd_probe(struct of_device *ofdev,
>  	const struct of_device_id *match)
>  {
> -	struct device_node *np = ofdev->node;
> +	struct device_node *np = ofdev->dev.of_node;
>  	struct device_node *codec_np = NULL;
>  	struct device_node *guts_np = NULL;
>  	struct device_node *dma_np = NULL;
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Grant Likely - March 11, 2010, 9:22 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Mark Brown
<broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:06:50AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
>> .node is being removed
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
>
> Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
>
> but please ensure that Liam and especially Timur also check this (both
> CCed).
>
> For enormous patch serieses like this it's really nice if you can ensure
> that each person is only CCed on the patches that they need to review.
> Much less stuff in the inbox.

Yeah, sorry about that (and to everyone receiving this thread, I'm
really sorry.  I won't do it again).  I've already been yelled at for
that.  What happened is that on a previous series I was yelled at for
not sending all patches to everyone (so that the patches could be
reviewed in context).  So, naturally, I made sure to include everyone
on the whole series this time....  doh.

Next time I post I'll constrain it to small chunks.

Thanks for the review.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jean Delvare - March 12, 2010, 8:26 a.m.
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:22:37 -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Mark Brown
> <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:06:50AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> >> .node is being removed
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> >
> > Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
> >
> > but please ensure that Liam and especially Timur also check this (both
> > CCed).
> >
> > For enormous patch serieses like this it's really nice if you can ensure
> > that each person is only CCed on the patches that they need to review.
> > Much less stuff in the inbox.
> 
> Yeah, sorry about that (and to everyone receiving this thread, I'm
> really sorry.  I won't do it again).  I've already been yelled at for
> that.  What happened is that on a previous series I was yelled at for
> not sending all patches to everyone (so that the patches could be
> reviewed in context).  So, naturally, I made sure to include everyone
> on the whole series this time....  doh.
> 
> Next time I post I'll constrain it to small chunks.

A good compromise IMHO is to send only the pieces they really have to
see and ack to each person, and provide a pointer to somewhere the full
series can be seen and downloaded for the interested.
Ben Dooks - April 5, 2010, 11:03 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:06:50AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> .node is being removed
> 
> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> ---
> 
>  sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
> index ef67d1c..d7e1b9a 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
> @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static struct snd_soc_ops mpc8610_hpcd_ops = {
>  static int mpc8610_hpcd_probe(struct of_device *ofdev,
>  	const struct of_device_id *match)
>  {
> -	struct device_node *np = ofdev->node;
> +	struct device_node *np = ofdev->dev.of_node;
>  	struct device_node *codec_np = NULL;
>  	struct device_node *guts_np = NULL;
>  	struct device_node *dma_np = NULL;

This looks like one case where an inline function would have been a
help.
Grant Likely - April 5, 2010, 11:47 p.m.
Hi Ben, thanks for the comment.  Reply below...

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:06:50AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
>> .node is being removed
[...]
>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
>> @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static struct snd_soc_ops mpc8610_hpcd_ops = {
>>  static int mpc8610_hpcd_probe(struct of_device *ofdev,
>>       const struct of_device_id *match)
>>  {
>> -     struct device_node *np = ofdev->node;
>> +     struct device_node *np = ofdev->dev.of_node;
>>       struct device_node *codec_np = NULL;
>>       struct device_node *guts_np = NULL;
>>       struct device_node *dma_np = NULL;
>
> This looks like one case where an inline function would have been a
> help.

In what regard (how would you like it to look)?  The node pointer
location is very unlikely to move again, and I prefer the clarity of
direct dereferencing.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Patch

diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
index ef67d1c..d7e1b9a 100644
--- a/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
+++ b/sound/soc/fsl/mpc8610_hpcd.c
@@ -202,7 +202,7 @@  static struct snd_soc_ops mpc8610_hpcd_ops = {
 static int mpc8610_hpcd_probe(struct of_device *ofdev,
 	const struct of_device_id *match)
 {
-	struct device_node *np = ofdev->node;
+	struct device_node *np = ofdev->dev.of_node;
 	struct device_node *codec_np = NULL;
 	struct device_node *guts_np = NULL;
 	struct device_node *dma_np = NULL;