Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Jul 2022 09:17:21 +0800 (CST) | From | "Liang He" <> | Subject | Re:Re: [PATCH] soc: amlogic: meson-pwrc: Hold reference returned by of_get_parent() |
| |
At 2022-07-26 03:46:30, "Martin Blumenstingl" <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote: >Hello, > >thank you for your patch! > >On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 4:20 AM Liang He <windhl@126.com> wrote: >[...] >> + struct device_node *np; >> >> int i, ret; >> >> match = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); >> @@ -495,7 +496,9 @@ static int meson_ee_pwrc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> >> pwrc->xlate.num_domains = match->count; >> >> - regmap_hhi = syscon_node_to_regmap(of_get_parent(pdev->dev.of_node)); >> + np = of_get_parent(pdev->dev.of_node); >> + regmap_hhi = syscon_node_to_regmap(np); >This works but I had to read the code twice because I thought the >wrong struct device_node was used. >Other drivers typically use "np" for whatever the code section >currently refers to. In this case the code section is about the power >controller, so I thought that "np" was the same as >"pdev->dev.of_node". > >I think the code would be easier to understand and the likelihood of >someone making the same mistake as I did if you could rename "np" to >"parent_np" (just like you have done in your other patches). > >[...] >> + struct device_node *np;
>same as above, I suggest renaming this to parent_np.
Hi, Martin,
I notice the declarations keep the reverse Christmas tree order, should I keep that order as the 'parent_np' will become longer than 'np'.
Thanks, Liang
| |