remoteproc: st: Use of_property_present() for testing DT property presence
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 remoteproc: st: Use of_property_present() for testing DT property presence
It is preferred to use typed property access functions (i.e. of_property_read_<type> functions) rather than low-level of_get_property/of_find_property functions for reading properties. As part of this, convert of_get_property/of_find_property calls to the recently added of_property_present() helper when we just want to test for presence of a property and nothing more.
--- drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c +1 -1
@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int st_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)clk_set_rate (ddata->clk, ddata->clk_rate); } -if (of_get_property (np,"mbox-names" ,NULL )) { +if (of_property_present (np,"mbox-names" )) { ddata->mbox_client_vq0.dev = dev; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_done =NULL ; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_block = false;
Signature · 7 lines
2.39.2 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Quoted 18 lines · Rob Herring
It is preferred to use typed property access functions (i.e. of_property_read_<type> functions) rather than low-level of_get_property/of_find_property functions for reading properties. As part of this, convert of_get_property/of_find_property calls to the recently added
of_property_present()helper when we just want to test for presence of a property and nothing more.Signed-off-by Rob Herring <[email protected]>--- drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c +0
-0
drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c static int st_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) · line 385
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c +1
-1@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int st_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)clk_set_rate (ddata->clk, ddata->clk_rate); } -if (of_get_property (np,"mbox-names" ,NULL )) { +if (of_property_present (np,"mbox-names" )) { ddata->mbox_client_vq0.dev = dev; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_done =NULL ; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_block = false;
Quoted 3 lines
--
2.39.2
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Quoted 11 lines · Rob Herring
It is preferred to use typed property access functions (i.e. of_property_read_<type> functions) rather than low-level of_get_property/of_find_property functions for reading properties. As part of this, convert of_get_property/of_find_property calls to the recently added
of_property_present()helper when we just want to test for presence of a property and nothing more.Signed-off-by Rob Herring <[email protected]>--- drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Ping!
Quoted 22 lines
drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c +1
-1@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int st_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)clk_set_rate (ddata->clk, ddata->clk_rate); } -if (of_get_property (np,"mbox-names" ,NULL )) { +if (of_property_present (np,"mbox-names" )) { ddata->mbox_client_vq0.dev = dev; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_done =NULL ; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_block = false;Signature · 7 lines
2.39.2 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Mathieu Poirier
maintainerQuoted 9 lines · Rob Herring
Quoted 7 lines · Rob Herring
It is preferred to use typed property access functions (i.e. of_property_read_<type> functions) rather than low-level of_get_property/of_find_property functions for reading properties. As part of this, convert of_get_property/of_find_property calls to the recently added
of_property_present()helper when we just want to test for presence of a property and nothing more.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Rob Herring <[email protected]>--- drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)Ping!
I did provide an RB for this patch on the same day you sent it, thinking it was part of a larger refactoring effort. But taking another look now I see that it is not the case and will apply it right away.
Quoted 23 lines
Quoted 23 lines
drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c +1
-2@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int st_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)clk_set_rate (ddata->clk, ddata->clk_rate); } -if (of_get_property (np,"mbox-names" ,NULL )) { +if (of_property_present (np,"mbox-names" )) { ddata->mbox_client_vq0.dev = dev; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_done =NULL ; ddata->mbox_client_vq0.tx_block = false; --2.39.2
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Quoted 8 lines · Rob Herring
It is preferred to use typed property access functions (i.e. of_property_read_<type> functions) rather than low-level of_get_property/of_find_property functions for reading properties. As part of this, convert of_get_property/of_find_property calls to the recently added
of_property_present()helper when we just want to test for presence of a property and nothing more.[...]
Applied, thanks!
[1/1] remoteproc: st: Use of_property_present() for testing DT property presence
commit: 1f6fa392a9942e4a2bd3122913baeb33e987ccd9
Best regards,
Signature · 1 line
Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>