All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Silesh C V <svellattu@mvista.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>,
	"Wei Hu(Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>,
	Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>,
	Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:19:06 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALabi0EZPOeyvXdw-JUvtnVz2tQQbmhAKKrUXfuc7yzcudFArw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181009110210.i6xphyuy5jkcfaug@katana>

Hello Wolfram,

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 4:32 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:47:24PM +0530, Silesh C V wrote:
> > Some drivers need to find the device on a bus having a specific firmware
> > node. Currently, such drivers have their own implementations to do this.
> > Provide a helper similar to bus_find_device_by_name so that each driver
> > does not have to reinvent this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Silesh C V <svellattu@mvista.com>
>
> Looks good in general, however:
>
> We recently had this discussion in I2C world about using the parent if
> the (logical) device has a NULL fw_node [1]. I don't know if the other
> subsystems you modify use logical devices as well? If no, it seems we
> need an additional check for the parent in the I2C core only. If yes,
> this might be considered in your patchset?

We can add an additional check for dev_fwnode(dev->parent) if match
for dev_fwnode(dev) fails in match_fwnode callback. Please correct me
if I am wrong. But then, we will be doing these two comparisons for
each device (until a match is found) on a bus for a bus_find_device
iteration(mostly unnecessarily because I could not find any "match
node" callbacks (for bus_find_device) currently doing this). So,
wouldn't it be better to add this check in exceptional cases (like in
the case of I2C) in the respective subsystems itself ?

Thanks,
Silesh

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Silesh C V <svellattu@mvista.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>,
	"Wei Hu(Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>,
	Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>,
	Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:19:06 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALabi0EZPOeyvXdw-JUvtnVz2tQQbmhAKKrUXfuc7yzcudFArw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181009110210.i6xphyuy5jkcfaug@katana>

Hello Wolfram,

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 4:32 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:47:24PM +0530, Silesh C V wrote:
> > Some drivers need to find the device on a bus having a specific firmware
> > node. Currently, such drivers have their own implementations to do this.
> > Provide a helper similar to bus_find_device_by_name so that each driver
> > does not have to reinvent this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Silesh C V <svellattu@mvista.com>
>
> Looks good in general, however:
>
> We recently had this discussion in I2C world about using the parent if
> the (logical) device has a NULL fw_node [1]. I don't know if the other
> subsystems you modify use logical devices as well? If no, it seems we
> need an additional check for the parent in the I2C core only. If yes,
> this might be considered in your patchset?

We can add an additional check for dev_fwnode(dev->parent) if match
for dev_fwnode(dev) fails in match_fwnode callback. Please correct me
if I am wrong. But then, we will be doing these two comparisons for
each device (until a match is found) on a bus for a bus_find_device
iteration(mostly unnecessarily because I could not find any "match
node" callbacks (for bus_find_device) currently doing this). So,
wouldn't it be better to add this check in exceptional cases (like in
the case of I2C) in the respective subsystems itself ?

Thanks,
Silesh

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: svellattu@mvista.com (Silesh C V)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:19:06 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALabi0EZPOeyvXdw-JUvtnVz2tQQbmhAKKrUXfuc7yzcudFArw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181009110210.i6xphyuy5jkcfaug@katana>

Hello Wolfram,

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 4:32 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:47:24PM +0530, Silesh C V wrote:
> > Some drivers need to find the device on a bus having a specific firmware
> > node. Currently, such drivers have their own implementations to do this.
> > Provide a helper similar to bus_find_device_by_name so that each driver
> > does not have to reinvent this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Silesh C V <svellattu@mvista.com>
>
> Looks good in general, however:
>
> We recently had this discussion in I2C world about using the parent if
> the (logical) device has a NULL fw_node [1]. I don't know if the other
> subsystems you modify use logical devices as well? If no, it seems we
> need an additional check for the parent in the I2C core only. If yes,
> this might be considered in your patchset?

We can add an additional check for dev_fwnode(dev->parent) if match
for dev_fwnode(dev) fails in match_fwnode callback. Please correct me
if I am wrong. But then, we will be doing these two comparisons for
each device (until a match is found) on a bus for a bus_find_device
iteration(mostly unnecessarily because I could not find any "match
node" callbacks (for bus_find_device) currently doing this). So,
wouldn't it be better to add this check in exceptional cases (like in
the case of I2C) in the respective subsystems itself ?

Thanks,
Silesh

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-10-10  2:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-09 10:17 [PATCH v3 1/2] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode Silesh C V
2018-10-09 10:17 ` Silesh C V
2018-10-09 10:17 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] treewide: use bus_find_device_by_fwnode Silesh C V
2018-10-09 10:17   ` Silesh C V
2018-10-09 17:44   ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-09 17:44     ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-10  2:58     ` Silesh C V
2018-10-10  2:58       ` Silesh C V
2018-10-10 19:05       ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 19:05         ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 19:05         ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 19:05         ` Rob Herring
2018-10-09 10:20 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 10:20   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 10:20   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 10:20   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 11:02 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-10-09 11:02   ` Wolfram Sang
2018-10-09 11:02   ` Wolfram Sang
2018-10-09 15:15   ` Mark Brown
2018-10-09 15:15     ` Mark Brown
2018-10-09 15:15     ` Mark Brown
2018-10-09 15:15     ` Mark Brown
2018-10-10  2:49   ` Silesh C V [this message]
2018-10-10  2:49     ` Silesh C V
2018-10-10  2:49     ` Silesh C V
2018-10-09 17:27 ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-09 17:27   ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-09 17:39   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 17:39     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 17:39     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 17:39     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-10-09 17:48     ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-09 17:48       ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-09 17:48       ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-09 17:48       ` Mathieu Poirier
2018-10-10  2:55       ` Silesh C V
2018-10-10  2:55         ` Silesh C V

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CALabi0EZPOeyvXdw-JUvtnVz2tQQbmhAKKrUXfuc7yzcudFArw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=svellattu@mvista.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oulijun@huawei.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=salil.mehta@huawei.com \
    --cc=srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    --cc=xavier.huwei@huawei.com \
    --cc=yisen.zhuang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.