On 08/16/2019 12:43 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:19:42AM +0200, Max Staudt wrote:
>> On 08/15/2019 02:58 PM, Max Staudt wrote:
>>> - if (of_node) {
>>> - ret = of_property_read_u32_array(of_node, "lltc,meas-mode",
>>> - data->mode, 2);
>>> + if (i2c->dev.of_node || i2c->dev.fwnode) {
>>
>> One more idea, would it be better here to do the following?
>>
>> if (device_property_present(i2c->dev, "lltc,meas-mode")) {
>> ret = of_property_read_u32_array(of_node, "lltc,meas-mode",
>> data->mode, 2);
>> }
>>
>> I'm happy to prepare a patch if you wish to have this in - just let me know
>> whether it should be on top of the last one, or instead of it.
>
> That would be semantically different. The property is currently mandatory.
> The above code would make it optional. This might work:
>
> if (dev_fwnode(&i2c->dev)) {
> ret = device_property_read_u32_array(...);
> ...
> }
Fair point. The semantic change was part of my question, but the more I think
about it, the less I want to open this can of worms. We can still make the
property optional later on, while it's not as easy to make it mandatory.
I'll send a patch with your suggestion.
Thanks!
Max
