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=-4.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 A3540C2D0A8 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 14:18:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7277F2075A for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 14:18:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1601302685; bh=n0SDEJiGHKBMiTQJpDhH++PpVZUE8wCtPQdFHZ2pW3Y=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=AIOo1ypQitUvPvflGr1/uIwJPo+32JUnJrjCTN65NofNgRZ4OdsgzARYtNHYQjF/s guerrjpxsBlhj4CMe/JNVQTz1aXWamDyljmN8TUfzf/2IKmCHljpJ0+4Un68b8LLTR uclqpF1IAYrg4aAR1dl60CR1utX4csg6CiHPj4sM= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726526AbgI1OSC (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 10:18:02 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f67.google.com ([209.85.210.67]:38329 "EHLO mail-ot1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726327AbgI1OSB (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 10:18:01 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f67.google.com with SMTP id y5so1053038otg.5; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 07:18:01 -0700 (PDT) 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=n0SDEJiGHKBMiTQJpDhH++PpVZUE8wCtPQdFHZ2pW3Y=; b=Ka81PzCmBX2fVD7A+82y+0iF4vTzQeEq6t3TycROq/IlHxeD8GqaExZb623uDgA+jT hR9cVsF7rwuJ64i+FfEXMir+MPJKRPuAi/5CNBeAAlPkNJ7sDggQZVzIbOhPX8TNNGyo rAZ416tqqAk80v5ZlrYcEqiAPWs8/OHJMNOg/3mPiXv5xkXhssoHCfTXJC6gVoaVRWGb GnDkXsKwru3004DtcKQ7kWHDl87z1o68OOMXVW4TnXtaUYb77nxrg7KKUYkKrPDduY6V vRjmpkWEH8t0UewNlILHHkeMshqZsBO95L+7BL9JrK+AOdW73Hlr05E0nDiXoxZk+Dc2 eBZw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532dP78vhbbdYRz1U/4mxx4wugI1Y/9ugc4RmtVcUn3QhdFC/EGj HJjdA1lC3NDfIntJtqlYI6yT9+TkZaRunl0kEPQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6eV4I4wC0CrXWH8jkFLr1VayvxIEzXRxTuz0YVtl3qOlZAg+2X0ohUMDuRUAmdp8Am59xUkdBoyfLCAAEtBM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1f16:: with SMTP id u22mr1078670otg.118.1601302680861; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 07:18:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200903081550.6012-1-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> <20200911130104.GF26842@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <6dea1206-cfaa-bfc5-d57e-4dcddadc03c7@lucaceresoli.net> <20200914094727.GM26842@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <20200926123807.GA3781977@chromium.org> <20200927193900.GA30711@kunai> In-Reply-To: From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 16:17:44 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/6] Support running driver's probe for a device powered off To: Tomasz Figa Cc: Wolfram Sang , Sakari Ailus , Luca Ceresoli , linux-i2c , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Mani, Rajmohan" , Bartosz Golaszewski , Bingbu Cao , Chiranjeevi Rapolu , Hyungwoo Yang , Linux Media Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 9:44 PM Tomasz Figa wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 9:39 PM Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > > I think we might be overly complicating things. IMHO the series as is > > > with the "i2c_" prefix removed from the flags introduced would be > > > reusable as is for any other subsystem that needs it. Of course, for > > > now, the handling of the flag would remain implemented only in the I2C > > > subsystem. > > > > Just to be clear: you are suggesting to remove "i2c" from the DSD > > binding "i2c-allow-low-power-probe". And you are not talking about > > moving I2C_DRV_FL_ALLOW_LOW_POWER_PROBE to struct device_driver? I > > recall the latter has been NACKed by gkh so far. > > > > I'd also drop "I2C_" from "I2C_DRV_FL_ALLOW_LOW_POWER_PROBE", but all > the implementation would remain where it is in the code. IOW, I'm just > suggesting a naming change to avoid proliferating duplicate flags of > the same meaning across subsystems. But that would indicate that the property was recognized by other subsystems which wouldn't be the case, so it would be confusing. That's why it cannot be documented as a general property ATM too.