Hi Juha, On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 at 16:57, Juha Sarlin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 24 Nov 2019, at 19:37, Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 11/24/19 7:09 PM, Juha Sarlin wrote: > >> While searching for a BLK device, this function checks only for a > >> matching devnum. It should check if_type, too. > > > > Could you, please, describe in which cases you have observed a problem > > and how it can be reproduced. > > > > According to the function description the relevant interface type check is > > device_get_uclass_id(dev->parent) != uclass_id > > I was wrong, it isn't really a bug. I was misled by all the other blk-finding > functions that check if_type instead of parent class. I think that checking > if_type would work here, too. > > Or perhaps this case is the first step towards removing the if_type field in > the future? There seems to be a 1-1 mapping from almost every if_type to > uclass_id. >
Thanks for the patch. In this case it is the intended behaviour I think, because if_type_to_uclass_id() gives us the uclass to use, and we check that immediately below your patch. Since there is a 1:1 correspondence between if_type and uclass_id (apart from those we want to remove) we don't need to check both. Yes it would be nice to remove if_type one day. Regards, Simon
