Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751758AbdC0HbU (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 03:31:20 -0400 Received: from mail-ot0-f177.google.com ([74.125.82.177]:33911 "EHLO mail-ot0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751406AbdC0HbL (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 03:31:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170327055454.c6kj4keeudqn4bps@builder> References: <20170324103940.30902-1-tobias.regnery@gmail.com> <20170327055454.c6kj4keeudqn4bps@builder> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:31:09 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nE5XkR4EcMZN5WEcaesJsD-gNV4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: add stub for of_n_addr_cells To: Tobias Regnery Cc: Rob Herring , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Simon Horman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 649 Lines: 24 On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Tobias Regnery wrote: > On 24.03.17, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> > >> > +static inline int of_n_addr_cells(struct device_node *np) >> > +{ >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> >> This looks good, but we should also do the same thing for of_n_size_cells(). >> >> I think I sent something like this a few years ago, but never resubmitted it >> when it was ignored at first. >> >> Arnd > > This seems sensible, I can send an updated patch with this change or I can > send it as a separate patch, whatever the maintainers prefer. I'd recommend sending an updated patch. Arnd