Am Montag, den 05.09.2016, 10:01 +0200 schrieb Philipp Zabel:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 04.09.2016, 08:45 +0200 schrieb Christophe JAILLET:
> > This code is spurious.
> > It takes a ref on a node, then call 'of_node_put' on it and then store
> > this node somewhere.
>
> The node
Hi Christophe,
Am Sonntag, den 04.09.2016, 08:45 +0200 schrieb Christophe JAILLET:
> This code is spurious.
> It takes a ref on a node, then call 'of_node_put' on it and then store
> this node somewhere.
The node pointer is not stored. Note that np is not dereferenced at all,
we just compare the
This code is spurious.
It takes a ref on a node, then call 'of_node_put' on it and then store
this node somewhere.
It is likely that taking the ref on the parent node and releasing the child
node was expected instead.
So, use 'of_get_next_parent' instead. It does all this in just one
function
