Re: [PATCH] of: Add more stubs for non-OF builds

[Alexander Shiyan]

> Perhaps a more specific subject.

I can just specify stub function names in the subject.
Is this enough?

> On 06/17/2013 12:24 PM, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> > Patch adds of_get_next_child and of_get_next_available_child
> > stubs for non-OF builds.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <shc_work at mail.ru>
> > ---
> 
> What changed for v2?

v1 not contain "inline" for prototypes.

> >  include/linux/of.h | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h
> > index 1fd08ca..df0e644 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/of.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> > @@ -366,8 +366,17 @@ static inline bool of_have_populated_dt(void)
> >  	return false;
> >  }
> >  
> > -#define for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \
> > -	while (0)
> > +static struct device_node *of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node,
> > +					     struct device_node *prev)
> > +{
> > +	return NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct device_node *of_get_next_available_child(
> > +	const struct device_node *node, struct device_node *prev)
> > +{
> > +	return NULL;
> > +}
> >  
> >  static inline struct device_node *of_get_child_by_name(
> >  					const struct device_node *node,
> > @@ -376,6 +385,9 @@ static inline struct device_node *of_get_child_by_name(
> >  	return NULL;
> >  }
> >  
> > +#define for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \
> 
> parent and child need unused annotations to avoid unused variable warnings.

This define has been moved just for keep same order as for OF-version.

---