On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 14:09 -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 11:27:23AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > It does what pci_device_to_OF_node() does, but in the right way. > > > > The plan is to remove pci_device_to_OF_node() once all the callers have > > been converted to properly handle the refcounting. > > Oh. Yes. well, of course, then. Excellent reason. I didn't get > that from the patch commit comments. So, FWIW: > > Ack'ed-by: Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thanks for the ACK. But on further consideration I'm going to NACK my own patch :) The reasoning being that a lot of the code that uses pci_device_to_OF_node() only uses the device_node while it also holds a reference to the pci_dev - so there's no possibility of the device_node going away. So Ben suggested what we really want is two routines, of_get_pci_dev_node() and of_peek_pci_dev_node() - the former returning a refcounted copy and the latter allowing you to "peek" at the device_node as long as you own the pci_dev. I'm not sure it's worth the churn really, so we should probably just document that pci_device_to_OF_node() is contrary, and any users that need a reference can take one explicitly. cheers -- Michael Ellerman OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183) We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
