Re: [PATCH] property: Use tidy for_each_named_* macros

[Matti Vaittinen]

On 14/04/2025 22:14, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:47:44 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 09:46:14AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 02:52:00PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > > > Implementing if-conditions inside for_each_x() macros requires some
> > > > thinking to avoid side effects in the calling code. Resulting code
> > > > may look somewhat awkward, and there are couple of different ways it is
> > > > usually done.
> > > >
> > > > Standardizing this to one way can help making it more obvious for a code
> > > > reader and writer. The newly added for_each_if() is a way to achieve this.
> > > >
> > > > Use for_each_if() to make these macros look like many others which
> > > > should in the long run help reading the code.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Thanks for cleaning these up!
> > >    
> > > > ---
> > > > The patch was crafted against the IIO/testing branch, and it depends on
> > > > the 76125d7801e5 ("property: Add functions to iterate named child").
> > > > Hence I'd suggest taking this via IIO tree (if this gets accepted).
> > >
> > > I'm not sure why. The for_each_if() is part of v6.15-rc1.
> >
> > Ah, I see, you are trying to fix newly introduced stuff? I would rather suggest
> > to make this straightforward against the current upstream and ask Jonathan to
> > rebase the testing to fold the fixes into a new APIs.
>
> Or we just do this next cycle maybe. 

I'm not against either of the approaches. I'm (mostly) staying away from 
the computer for this and the next week, so re-spinning this will in any 
case get delayed. In that regard, the next cycle won't be that far away.

> Definitely not going to take anything
> through IIO that hasn't been on the iio list btw.

Ah. Thanks for pointing this out Jonathan! I just used the 
get_maintainer.pl - and added You. I definitely should have added the 
IIO-list!

Yours,
	-- Matti