Hi Rob, again
> > This is assuming there's just 1 port and 1 endpoint, but let's be
> > specific as the bindings are (first endpoint on port 0):
> >
> > of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(client->dev.of_node, 0, -1);
> >
> > Note we could ask for endpoint 0 here, but the bindings generally allow
Hi Rob
> I've read the threads already and think you should skip the rename. Just
> put 'port' in the name of the new one.
OK
> That and taking a port number param should be enough distinction.
I think we want to use "port" directly instead of "port number"
on new function.
Thank you for
On Sun, Feb 04, 2024 at 11:44:39PM +, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
>
> Hi Rob
>
> > This is assuming there's just 1 port and 1 endpoint, but let's be
> > specific as the bindings are (first endpoint on port 0):
> >
> > of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(client->dev.of_node, 0, -1);
> >
> > Note we
Hi Rob
> This is assuming there's just 1 port and 1 endpoint, but let's be
> specific as the bindings are (first endpoint on port 0):
>
> of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(client->dev.of_node, 0, -1);
>
> Note we could ask for endpoint 0 here, but the bindings generally allow
> for more than 1.
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 05:05:27AM +, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> of_graph_get_next_endpoint() is now renamed to
> of_graph_get_next_device_endpoint(). Switch to it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto
> ---
> drivers/media/i2c/adv7343.c | 2 +-
>
