Hi Simon
On 10/19/18 5:27 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Patrick,
On 15 October 2018 at 03:01, Patrice CHOTARD patrice.chotard@st.com wrote:
Hi Bin
On 10/12/2018 12:13 PM, Bin Meng wrote:
Hi Patrice,
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:51 PM Patrice CHOTARD patrice.chotard@st.com wrote:
Hi Bin
On 10/11/2018 11:06 AM, Bin Meng wrote:
Hi Patrice,
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:41 PM Patrice Chotard patrice.chotard@st.com wrote:
Add uclass_foreach_dev_probe() which iterates through devices of a given uclass. Devices are probed if necessary and are ready to use.
Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard patrice.chotard@st.com Reviewed-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
Changes in v3: None Changes in v2: None
include/dm/uclass.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/dm/uclass.h b/include/dm/uclass.h index 6e7c1cd3e8bc..10ccfdce951e 100644 --- a/include/dm/uclass.h +++ b/include/dm/uclass.h @@ -376,4 +376,20 @@ int uclass_resolve_seq(struct udevice *dev); #define uclass_foreach_dev_safe(pos, next, uc) \ list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, next, &uc->dev_head, uclass_node)
+/**
- uclass_foreach_dev_probe() - Helper function to iteration through devices
- of given uclass
- This creates a for() loop which works through the available devices in
- a uclass in order from start to end. Devices are probed if necessary,
- and ready for use.
- @id: Uclass ID
- @dev: struct udevice * to hold the current device. Set to NULL when there
- are no more devices.
- */
+#define uclass_foreach_dev_probe(id, dev) \
for (uclass_first_device(id, &dev); dev; \uclass_next_device(&dev))Shouldn't we check the return value of uclass_first_device() and uclass_next_device()?
It's not necessary to check the return value of uclass_first_device(id, &dev) because in any error case, dev is NULL, which is the loop output condition. This is only for the first iteration.
Please see the comment of uclass_first_device().
- @devp: Returns pointer to the first device in that uclass if no error
- occurred, or NULL if there is no first device, or an error occurred with
- that device.
- @return 0 if OK (found or not found), other -ve on error
So it can return error with a valid dev.
I checked the uclass_first_device() implementation and the comment seems not aligned with what is coded. When uclass_first_device() returns a valid dev, return value is always 0. (see uclass_get_device_tail() return value).
I actually don't like this function. Let's use uclass_first_device_err() when we care about errors. I am wondering if we should delete uclass_first_device().
Ok i will use uclass_first_device_err() instead
In any case uclass_first_device() returns a valid dev with an error.
Simon, Bin do you confirm ?
I don't see how, no.
For the other iteration, dev comes from uclass_next_device(&dev), similarly to uclass_first_device(), in any error case dev is NULL.
Similar please see the comment of uclass_next_device().
I have the same remark regarding uclass_next_device().
I will add a new uclass_next_device_err()
Thanks
Patrice
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org