From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fvd6K-0003QY-2B for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 06:40:13 +0000 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 08:40:00 +0200 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20180831064000.ft7rz6ga5r3vzngt@pengutronix.de> References: <20180829072153.13428-1-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <20180829075844.xbolj65w3vksngvu@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bbu: Look for default handler in barebox_update_handler_exists() To: Andrey Smirnov Cc: Barebox List On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 10:23:12PM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:58 AM Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:21:52AM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > > > Convert barebox_update_handler_exists() to treat struct bbu_data with > > > both "handler_name" and "devicefile" set to NULL as a specifier for > > > default update handler in order to support such use-case for > > > "barebox_update" and fix a recent regression. > > > > > > This change shouldn't affect another user of > > > barebox_update_handler_exists(), cb_flash() in > > > drivers/usb/gadget/f_fastboot.c, since that function explicitly > > > specifies "devicefile". > > > > > > Fixes 0ac96ab6e ("bbu: command: Make sure specified update handler exists") > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov > > > --- > > > common/bbu.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/common/bbu.c b/common/bbu.c > > > index 3974bf672..ffe5e15a2 100644 > > > --- a/common/bbu.c > > > +++ b/common/bbu.c > > > @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ bool barebox_update_handler_exists(struct bbu_data *data) > > > if (handler) > > > return true; > > > > > > - if (!data->handler_name) > > > + if (!data->handler_name && data->devicefile) > > > return false; > > > > > > return bbu_find_handler(data->handler_name) != NULL; > > > > This function is confusing. We should split this up into two functions: > > barebox_update_handler_exists_for_name() and > > barebox_update_handler_exists_for_devpath() *). Fastboot would only need > > the latter and the barebox_update command would use both, possibly > > barking when both a name and a device is given (as otherwise we would > > have to check for name <-> devpath conflicts) > > > > What if we just expose already existing bbu_find_handler (potentially > renaming it to bbu_find_handler_by_name()) and > bbu_find_handler_by_device() instead and use them as you propose? That would be fine also. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox