From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A576C61DD8 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 16:26:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA50222314 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 16:26:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732072AbgKPQZp (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:25:45 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f66.google.com ([209.85.210.66]:34562 "EHLO mail-ot1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731416AbgKPQZo (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:25:44 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f66.google.com with SMTP id j14so16589322ots.1; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:25:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1Nc27M9ki9nKK3SIKwkHCnsf1A8616+iJpgisEL0zo4=; b=ihWUupm7LNY6quJsfIwPiAH98FIeUh4boKu5Y5ptabQAh4xA4JavBtrVCGUpO56bLf VMRx69ePxkDRGQ4Bt17xPqQGSh0F0oJBdvoBODOlZRK8T+KtcVtek09uUAv3cv/buMs9 KMvuXOVoDrwVgLXKhQSJh4FOlsipo71F7Y8oEe1eXDIWYF5BDSvtyzbZcsJXtgAXBl0s eMqimhASylpvN6YdSt+FnNtYCNcG12mjrhRqVnYuzljSLsQEk3JWZeL3WYsC+FoeC7yD 60nzkpE+MPXygNgYhpPdH/5VGTly5lcBNvSufmCedpwV+sr1GY6a5/iDdS1NEx8hgAi5 zeCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5300NB1LYG98CRkYLEzZfZ0mCV1WgfllYORH6dX2EU2ap+/uO0Hg je0KtKrlh1zlefuElJGEf6SMiWD4DOvDNPdqrJw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwkIGRT8KJ1R50oN/HYp+g+UTL1v50WX4tmwPKkYgyP3a0+sWiF5eWeqZBT3UMgTvZ/iOm+4l1OeljlMxM0GpI= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:222f:: with SMTP id o44mr15316ota.321.1605543943606; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:25:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201104232356.4038506-1-saravanak@google.com> <20201104232356.4038506-13-saravanak@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20201104232356.4038506-13-saravanak@google.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:25:32 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 12/18] driver core: Add fw_devlink_parse_fwtree() To: Saravana Kannan Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ard Biesheuvel , Rob Herring , Frank Rowand , Marc Zyngier , Thomas Gleixner , Tomi Valkeinen , Laurent Pinchart , Grygorii Strashko , "Cc: Android Kernel" , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-efi , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 12:24 AM Saravana Kannan wrote: > > This function is a wrapper around fwnode_operations.add_links(). > > This function parses each node in a fwnode tree and create fwnode links > for each of those nodes. The information for creating the fwnode links > (the supplier and consumer fwnode) is obtained by parsing the properties > in each of the fwnodes. > > This function also ensures that no fwnode is parsed more than once by > marking the fwnodes as parsed. > > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan > --- > drivers/base/core.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/fwnode.h | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c > index 4a0907574646..ee28d8c7ee85 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/core.c > +++ b/drivers/base/core.c > @@ -1543,6 +1543,25 @@ static bool fw_devlink_is_permissive(void) > return fw_devlink_flags == DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY; > } > > +static void fw_devlink_parse_fwnode(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) > +{ > + if (fwnode->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_LINKS_ADDED) > + return; Why is the flag needed? Duplicate links won't be created anyway and it doesn't cause the tree walk to be terminated. > + > + fwnode_call_int_op(fwnode, add_links, NULL); > + fwnode->flags |= FWNODE_FLAG_LINKS_ADDED; > +} > + > +static void fw_devlink_parse_fwtree(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) > +{ > + struct fwnode_handle *child = NULL; > + > + fw_devlink_parse_fwnode(fwnode); > + > + while ((child = fwnode_get_next_available_child_node(fwnode, child))) I'd prefer for (child = NULL; child; child = fwnode_get_next_available_child_node(fwnode, child)) > + fw_devlink_parse_fwtree(child); > +} > + > static void fw_devlink_link_device(struct device *dev) > { > int fw_ret; > diff --git a/include/linux/fwnode.h b/include/linux/fwnode.h > index ec02e1e939cc..9aaf9e4f3994 100644 > --- a/include/linux/fwnode.h > +++ b/include/linux/fwnode.h > @@ -15,12 +15,15 @@ > struct fwnode_operations; > struct device; > Description here, please. > +#define FWNODE_FLAG_LINKS_ADDED BIT(0) > + > struct fwnode_handle { > struct fwnode_handle *secondary; > const struct fwnode_operations *ops; > struct device *dev; > struct list_head suppliers; > struct list_head consumers; > + u32 flags; That's a bit wasteful. Maybe u8 would suffice for the time being? > }; > > struct fwnode_link { > -- > 2.29.1.341.ge80a0c044ae-goog >