lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectShould regulator core support parsing OF based fwnode? (was: Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] leds: Add of_led_get() and led_put())
From
Date
On 10/3/19 9:41 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 09:21:06PM +0200, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> On 10/3/19 8:35 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 07:43:17PM +0200, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>> On 10/3/19 2:47 PM, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote:
>>>>> On 03/10/2019 12:42, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 10:28:09AM +0200, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote:
>
>>> This mail has nothing relevant in the subject line and pages of quotes
>>> before the question for me, it's kind of lucky I noticed it....
>
>> Isn't it all about creating proper filters?
>
> My point there is that there's nothing obvious in the mail that suggests
> it should get past filters - just being CCed on a mail isn't super
> reliable, people often get pulled in due to things like checkpatch or
> someone copying a CC list from an earlier patch series where there were
> things were relevant.

OK, updated the subject.

>>>> I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to add support for fwnode
>>>> parsing to regulator core. Or maybe it is either somehow supported
>>>> or not supported on purpose?
>
>>> Anything attempting to use the regulator DT bindings in ACPI has very
>>> serious problems, ACPI has its own power model which isn't compatible
>>> with that used in DT.
>
>> We have a means for checking if fwnode refers to of_node:
>
>> is_of_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
>
>> Couldn't it be employed for OF case?
>
> Why would we want to do that? We'd continue to support only DT systems,
> just with code that's less obviously DT only and would need to put
> checks in. I'm not seeing an upside here.

For instance few weeks ago we had a patch [0] in the LED core switching
from using struct device's of_node property to fwnode for conveying
device property data. And this transition to fwnode property API can be
observed as a frequent pattern across subsystems.

Recently there is an ongoing effort aiming to add generic support for
handling regulators in the LED core [1], but it turns out to require
bringing back initialization of of_node property for
devm_regulator_get_optional() to work properly.

Support for OF related fwnodes in regulator core could help reducing
this noise.

[0]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/leds/led-class.c?id=fd81d7e946c6bdb86dbf0bd88fee3e1a545e7979
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-leds/20190923102059.17818-4-jjhiblot@ti.com/

--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-10-03 22:28    [W:0.125 / U:3.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site