On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:25:25AM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:

On 03/21/2012 09:48 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:

quoted

On 03/21/2012 01:31 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 01:44:36AM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

+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.

Yes, and it's meaningless to keep going forward if np is NULL.

quoted

quoted

quoted

+		}
+
+		/* 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?

Yes, i'm ok with it.

Regards
Dong Aisheng