Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 23 Jul 2021 15:32:48 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     Daniel Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        rafael@kernel.org, laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] device property: Check fwnode->secondary in
 fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint()
Message-ID: <YPq28BNOmqZPdRqq@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20210722201929.3585671-1-djrscally@gmail.com>
 <20210722201929.3585671-2-djrscally@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210722201929.3585671-2-djrscally@gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 09:19:28PM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote:
> Sensor drivers often check for an endpoint to make sure that they're
> connected to a consuming device like a CIO2 during .probe(). Some of
> those endpoints might be in the form of software_nodes assigned as
> a secondary to the device's fwnode_handle. Account for this possibility
> in fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint() to avoid having to do it in the
> sensor drivers themselves.

...

> +	ep = fwnode_call_ptr_op(parent, graph_get_next_endpoint, prev);
> +
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ep) && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent) &&
> +	    !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent->secondary))

Nit-pick, I would put it like:

	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent->secondary) && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent) &&
	    IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ep))

or

	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ep) &&
	    !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent->secondary) && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(parent))

for the sake of logical split.

> +		ep = fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint(parent->secondary, NULL);

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko