Hi Simon, On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi Mario, > > On 28 March 2018 at 20:38, Mario Six <mario....@gdsys.cc> wrote: >> A lot of times one wants to cycle through the devices in a uclass, but >> only certain ones, especially ones identified by their compatibility >> string, and ignore all others (in the best case this procedure should >> not even activate the devices one is not interested in). >> >> Hence, we add a pair of functions similar to uclass_{first,next}_device, >> but taking a compatibility string as an additional argument, which cycle >> through the devices of a uclass that conform to this compatibility >> string. > > Can we not use a phandle to find the device? Using raw compatible > strings feel bad (and slow to me). > > If not, a please add a sandbox test. >
A phandle would indeed be the cleaner solution, but it won't work if you have to get device handles in board files, since there is no device for a board you could query for a phandle. And the MPC83xx board this series leads up to needs to gather numerous device handles for configuration and querying purposes. If there was a underlying device for the board functions there would be no issue with using a phandle, but as it is, it sadly won't work. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mario Six <mario....@gdsys.cc> >> --- >> drivers/core/uclass.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/dm/uclass.h | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+) > > Regards, > Simon > Best regards, Mario _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot