lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/5] thermal: devfreq_cooling: add new registration functions with Energy Model
On Wednesday 02 Dec 2020 at 11:14:02 (+0000), Lukasz Luba wrote:
> Hi Ionela,
>
> On 12/2/20 10:24 AM, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> > Hi Lukasz,
> >
> > On Wednesday 18 Nov 2020 at 12:03:56 (+0000), Lukasz Luba wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > + struct device_node *np = NULL;
>
> [snip]
>
> > > +
> > > + if (dev->of_node)
> > > + np = of_node_get(dev->of_node);
> > > +
> >
> > Should np be checked before use? I'm not sure if it's better to do the
> > assign first and then the check on np before use. It depends on the
> > consequences of passing a NULL node pointer later on.
>
> The np is actually dev->of_node (or left NULL, as set at the begging).
> The only meaning of the line above is to increment the counter and then
> decrement if CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC was used.
> The devfreq_cooling_register() has np = NULL and the registration can
> handle it, so we should be OK here as well.
>

Yes, I just wanted to make sure later registration can handle np = NULL,
or whether we need to bail out.

In this case, you can drop both ifs - for (dev->of_node) before get and
for np before put below, as of_node_get/of_node_put can handle NULL
pointers themselves.

Thanks,
Ionela.

> >
> > > + cdev = of_devfreq_cooling_register_power(np, df, dfc_power);
> > > +
> > > + if (np)
> > > + of_node_put(np);
> > > +
>
> [snip]
>
> > >
> >
> > Otherwise it looks good to me:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
>
> Thank you for the review.
>
> Regards,
> Lukasz
>
> >
> > Ionela.
> >

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-02 12:51    [W:0.190 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site