[PATCH -next v2] arm64: use for_each_node_by_type() macro

[Sudeep KarkadaNagesha]

On 30/10/13 12:16, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 11:49:12AM +0000, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> On 30/10/13 05:54, Wei Yongjun wrote:
>>> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei at trendmicro.com.cn>
>>>
>>> Use for_each_node_by_type() macro instead of open coding it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei at trendmicro.com.cn>
>>> ---
>>> v1 -> v2: remove extra space
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c | 4 ++--
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
>>> index aa0c9e7..37a4977 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
>>> @@ -78,10 +78,10 @@ int __init cpu_read_ops(struct device_node *dn, int cpu)
>>>  
>>>  void __init cpu_read_bootcpu_ops(void)
>>>  {
>>> -	struct device_node *dn = NULL;
>>> +	struct device_node *dn;
>>>  	u64 mpidr = cpu_logical_map(0);
>>>  
>>> -	while ((dn = of_find_node_by_type(dn, "cpu"))) {
>>> +	for_each_node_by_type(dn, "cpu") {
>>>  		u64 hwid;
>>>  		const __be32 *prop;
>>>  
>>
>> In fact this function can be simplified by making use of OF helper directly,
>> something like below snippet. But it requires [1] for correct functionality.
> 
> Thanks. Could you please send a properly formatted patch on top of [1]?

Yes it's done [2]

Regards,
Sudeep

[2] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg283243.html