Hi Ahmad,
On 5/15/24 08:35, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Michael,
>
> On 15.05.24 08:29, Michael Riesch wrote:
>> Hi Ahmad,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your patch!
>>
>> On 5/15/24 08:07, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>> This introduces no functional change, but makes code a bit more compact.
>>>
>>> Cc: Michael Riesch <michael.rie...@wolfvision.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fat...@pengutronix.de>
>>> ---
>>> common/boards/wolfvision/common.c | 6 +-----
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/common/boards/wolfvision/common.c
>>> b/common/boards/wolfvision/common.c
>>> index f483918cecfe..5484a8ac6b06 100644
>>> --- a/common/boards/wolfvision/common.c
>>> +++ b/common/boards/wolfvision/common.c
>>> @@ -62,11 +62,7 @@ int wolfvision_register_ethaddr(void)
>>> char mac[ETH_ALEN];
>>> int ret;
>>>
>>> - ret = of_device_ensure_probed_by_alias("state");
>>
>> Just to be on the safe side: of_device_ensure_probed_by_alias makes sure
>> that the underlying drivers are probed, right?
>
> Yes.
>
>>
>>> - if (ret)
>>> - return ret;
>>> -
>>> - state = state_by_name("state");
>>> + state = state_by_alias("state");
>>
>> state_by_alias, on the other hand, calls only of_find_node_by_alias,
>> which (as I presume) does not ensure that.
>
> Yes, but afterwards it calls state_by_node(), which calls
> of_device_ensure_probed().
Ah, nice!
>> IIRC the of_device_ensure_... magic was necessary in our setup, but I
>> can give your patch a test during the next round of barebox board code
>> cleanups.
>
> Yes, I ran into these problems before too on a deep probe system, which is
> why state_by_alias was added.
OK, this sounds good.
Reviewed-by: Michael Riesch <michael.rie...@wolfvision.net>
Thanks and regards,
Michael
>
> Cheers,
> Ahmad
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Michael
>>
>>> if (!state)
>>> return -ENOENT;
>>>
>>
>
