The cond-statement of this particular for() loop will always be
true as long as at least one voltage-shifting GPIO is present.
If it wasn't for the break below, we'd be stuck in a forever loop.
This patch inserts the correct cond-statement into the statement.
Cc: Mark Brown <broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org>
---
drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
b/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
index 3afa46a..5462c28 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ of_get_gpio_regulator_config(struct device *dev, struct
device_node *np)
if (!config->gpios)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
- for (i = 0; config->nr_gpios; i++) {
+ for (i = 0; i < config->nr_gpios; i++) {
gpio = of_get_named_gpio(np, "gpios", i);
if (gpio < 0)
break;
--
1.7.9.5
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
