Hari Bathini <hbath...@linux.ibm.com> writes: > On 03/09/19 10:01 PM, Hari Bathini wrote: >> > [...] >>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump.c >>>> index f7c8073..b8061fb9 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump.c >>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump.c >>>> @@ -114,6 +114,9 @@ int __init early_init_dt_scan_fw_dump(unsigned long >>>> node, const char *uname, >>>> if (strcmp(uname, "rtas") == 0) >>>> return rtas_fadump_dt_scan(&fw_dump, node); >>>> >>>> + if (strcmp(uname, "ibm,opal") == 0) >>>> + return opal_fadump_dt_scan(&fw_dump, node); >>>> + >>> >>> ie this would become: >>> >>> if (strcmp(uname, "ibm,opal") == 0 && opal_fadump_dt_scan(&fw_dump, >>> node)) >>> return 1; >>> >> >> Yeah. Will update accordingly... > > On second thoughts, we don't need a return type at all here. fw_dump struct > and callbacks are > populated based on what we found in the DT. And irrespective of what we found > in DT, we got > to return `1` once the particular depth and node is processed..
True. It's a little unclear because you're looking for "rtas" and "ibm,opal" in the same function. But we know™ that no platform should have both an "rtas" and an "ibm,opal" node, so once we find either we are done scanning, regardless of whether the foo_fadump_dt_scan() succeeds or fails. cheers
