From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
To: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: fwnode_for_each_child_node() and OF backend discrepancy
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 15:11:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vd6e3WwHPfyL=GP=vsoWhwGXadwQziiRRwfHPfjkX2eFg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f17d3ecfecf4491dd15b1fa092205f3f@walle.cc>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:54 PM Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> wrote:
>
> Am 2022-06-28 13:10, schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 02:49:51PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I tired to iterate over all child nodes, regardless if they are
> >> available
> >> or not. Now there is that handy fwnode_for_each_child_node() (and the
> >> fwnode_for_each_available_child_node()). The only thing is the OF
> >> backend
> >> already skips disabled nodes [1], making fwnode_for_each_child_node()
> >> and
> >> fwnode_for_each_available_child_node() behave the same with the OF
> >> backend.
> >>
> >> Doesn't seem to be noticed by anyone for now. I'm not sure how to fix
> >> that
> >> one. fwnode_for_each_child_node() and also
> >> fwnode_get_next_child_node() are
> >> used by a handful of drivers. I've looked at some, but couldn't decide
> >> whether they really want to iterate over all child nodes or just the
> >> enabled
> >> ones.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts?
> >
> > It was discussed at least twice this year (in regard to some new IIO
> > drivers)
> > and Rob told that iterating over disabled (not available) nodes in OF
> > kinda
> > legacy/design mistake. That's why device_for_each_child_node() goes
> > only
> > over available nodes only.
>
> Mh, but then the fwnode_for_each_child_node() is very misleading, esp.
> with the presence of fwnode_for_each_available_child_node().
>
> > So, why do you need to iterate over disabled ones?
>
> I was trying to fix the lan966x driver [1] which doesn't work if there
> are disabled nodes in between.
Can you elaborate what's wrong now in the behaviour of the driver? In
the code it uses twice the _available variant.
> My steps would have been:
> (1) change fwnode_for_each_available_child_node() to
> fwnode_for_each_child_node(), maybe with a fixes tag, as it's
> easy to backport
> (2) introduce new compatibles and deduce the number of ports
> according to the compatible string and not by counting
> the child nodes.
> (3) keep the old behavior for the legacy compatible and mark it
> as deprecated in the binding
> (4) move the device tree over to the new compatible string
> [1]
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19-rc4/source/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-28 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-27 12:49 fwnode_for_each_child_node() and OF backend discrepancy Michael Walle
2022-06-27 13:08 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-06-27 13:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-06-28 10:32 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-06-28 14:41 ` Sakari Ailus
2022-06-29 10:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-06-29 13:01 ` Grant Likely
2022-06-28 11:10 ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-28 11:36 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-28 13:11 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2022-06-28 13:23 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-28 13:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-28 13:47 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-28 13:51 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-06-28 14:22 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-28 14:36 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-06-28 15:09 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-28 15:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-06-28 20:28 ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-28 20:52 ` Horatiu Vultur
2022-06-28 21:07 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-30 20:16 ` Horatiu Vultur
2022-06-30 21:00 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-30 21:21 ` Vladimir Oltean
2022-06-30 21:32 ` Michael Walle
2022-06-28 21:59 ` Vladimir Oltean
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='CAHp75Vd6e3WwHPfyL=GP=vsoWhwGXadwQziiRRwfHPfjkX2eFg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael@walle.cc \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).