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(-)
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
index a3268d95a50e..50ef40671652 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
@@ -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
On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 at 07:51, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 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(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> index a3268d95a50e..50ef40671652 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> @@ -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;
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <[email protected]>
> --
> 2.39.2
>
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 08:47:35AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> 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!
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> index a3268d95a50e..50ef40671652 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> @@ -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
On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 at 10:26, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 08:47:35AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > 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!
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.
>
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> > index a3268d95a50e..50ef40671652 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/st_remoteproc.c
> > @@ -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
On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:47:35 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> 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,
--
Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>