[PATCH v6 12/22] core: fdtaddr: add devfdt_get_addr_size_index_ptr function

[Johan Jonker]

On 3/6/23 18:53, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Johan,
> 
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 17:15, Johan Jonker <jbx6244 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add devfdt_get_addr_size_index_ptr function with the same
>> functionality as devfdt_get_addr_size_index, but instead
>> a return pointer is given.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi <michael at amarulasolutions.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Johan Jonker <jbx6244 at gmail.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Michael Trimarchi <michael at amarulasolutions.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changed V5:
>>   fix spelling
>>   use tabs
>> ---
>>  drivers/core/fdtaddr.c |  8 ++++++++
>>  include/dm/fdtaddr.h   | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>>  2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/core/fdtaddr.c b/drivers/core/fdtaddr.c
>> index 91bcd1a2..f5906ff9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/core/fdtaddr.c
>> +++ b/drivers/core/fdtaddr.c
>> @@ -122,6 +122,14 @@ fdt_addr_t devfdt_get_addr_size_index(const struct udevice *dev, int index,
>>  #endif
>>  }
>>
>> +void *devfdt_get_addr_size_index_ptr(const struct udevice *dev, int index,
>> +                                    fdt_size_t *size)
>> +{
>> +       fdt_addr_t addr = devfdt_get_addr_size_index(dev, index, size);
>> +
>> +       return (addr == FDT_ADDR_T_NONE) ? NULL : (void *)(uintptr_t)addr;
> 
Just wondering, as a side question:
Why is Uboot maintaining/exporting 2 sets of functions that do the do the more or less the same thing.

For example:
devfdt_get_addr_size_index_ptr vs. dev_read_addr_size_index_ptr

Or should we standardize and replace all by dev_read_addr_size_index_ptr if possible?

Johan

> 
> [..]
> 
> Regards,
> SImon