On 04/03/14 17:47, Philipp Zabel wrote:

Am Dienstag, den 04.03.2014, 14:21 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen:

quoted

On 04/03/14 13:36, Philipp Zabel wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

Can port_node be NULL? Probably only if something is quite wrong, but
maybe it's safer to return error in that case.

both of_property_read_u32 and of_node_put can handle port_node == NULL.
I'll add a WARN_ONCE here as for of_graph_get_next_endpoint and continue
on.

Isn't it better to return an error?

I am not sure. We can still correctly parse the endpoint properties of a
parentless node. All current users ignore the return value anyway. So as
long as we still do the memset and and set local_node and id, returning
an error effectively won't change the current behaviour.

Is the parentless node case an error or not? If it's not, we can handle
it silently and return 0, no WARN needed. If it is an error, we should
return an error, even if nobody is currently handling that (which is a
bug in itself, as the function does return an error value, and callers
should handle it).

 Tomi