On 06/06/2023 22:29, Vikram Garhwal wrote: > Hi, > > On 6/5/23 12:12 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 02/06/2023 01:48, Vikram Garhwal wrote: >>> Add device_tree_find_node_by_path() to find a matching node with path >>> for a >> >> AFAICT, the only difference in name between the new function and the >> existing one is "device_tree" vs "dt". The latter is just a shorthand >> of "device tree", so it feels to me the name are a bit too similar. >> >> From my understanding, the main difference between the two functions >> are that the current one is starting from root whereas the current one >> is starting from a given node. So how about >> "dt_find_node_by_path_from()"? > Thank you for the suggestion. This name was added in v3 as Luca Fancellu > suggested to rename this function to "device_tree_find_node_by_path". I > am okay with renaming it to dt_find_node_by_path_from(). > > Luca, Michal and Henry: Does the dt_find_node_by_path_from() name works > for you? Works for me.
~Michal
