I've tweaked your patch to make the above (buggy) change a little clearer.

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 02:44:53PM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> -     for (i = 0;; i++) {
> -             port = of_parse_phandle(np, "ports", i);
> -             if (!port)
> -                     break;
> -
> -             if (!of_device_is_available(port->parent)) {
> -                     of_node_put(port);
> -                     continue;
> -             }
>  
> -             component_match_add(dev, &match, compare_of, port->parent);
> -             of_node_put(port);
> -     }

> -static int compare_of(struct device *dev, void *data)
> -{
> -     struct device_node *np = data;
> -
> -     return dev->of_node == np;
> -}

The original above passes port->parent to component_match_add().  This
means 'np' in the above compare_of() function is 'port->parent'.

This means the above comparison is effectively:

        dev->of_node == port->parent

The generic code instead does this:

                component_match_add(dev, &match, compare_of, port);

So what we get in the comparison function is 'port' rather than
'port->parent':

> +static int compare_port(struct device *dev, void *data)
>  {
> +     struct device_node *np = data;
> +     return dev->parent->of_node == np;
> +}

which means the comparison is:

        dev->parent->of_node == port

which is a different comparison from the above.

You instead want this to be:

        return dev->of_node == np->parent;

Heiko, please test the above change to compare_port() - I think you'll
find that will fix your issue.

Thanks.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.

Reply via email to