On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 06:11:52PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 01:31:15PM +0000, Daniel Scally wrote:
> > Registering software_nodes with the .parent member set to point to a
> > currently unregistered software_node has the potential for problems,
> > so enforce parent -> child ordering in arrays passed to this function.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally <djrsca...@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since RFC v3:
> >
> > Patch introduced
> >
> > drivers/base/swnode.c | 15 +++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/swnode.c b/drivers/base/swnode.c
> > index 615a0c93e116..af7930b3679e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/swnode.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/swnode.c
> > @@ -700,14 +700,21 @@ int software_node_register_nodes(const struct
> > software_node *nodes)
> > int i;
> >
> > for (i = 0; nodes[i].name; i++) {
> > + if (nodes[i].parent)
> > + if (!software_node_to_swnode(nodes[i].parent)) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto err_unregister_nodes;
> > + }
> > +
> > ret = software_node_register(&nodes[i]);
> > - if (ret) {
> > - software_node_unregister_nodes(nodes);
> > - return ret;
> > - }
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err_unregister_nodes;
> > }
> >
> > return 0;
>
> I'd add a blank line here.
>
> Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com>
I spoke a bit too soon. Could you update the documentation of the
function to explain this new requirement ?
> > +err_unregister_nodes:
> > + software_node_unregister_nodes(nodes);
> > + return ret;
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(software_node_register_nodes);
> >
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
