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=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 8D2D7C5517A for ; Sat, 24 Oct 2020 16:55:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E22620BED for ; Sat, 24 Oct 2020 16:55:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="U2NrGUJD" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762456AbgJXQzz (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Oct 2020 12:55:55 -0400 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([213.167.242.64]:38386 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762450AbgJXQzz (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Oct 2020 12:55:55 -0400 Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (62-78-145-57.bb.dnainternet.fi [62.78.145.57]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E5ECA43; Sat, 24 Oct 2020 18:55:52 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1603558552; bh=iwZCfHnxDvI7npLeEEZlTyt9HVGP23tXV1eY5GsaguI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=U2NrGUJDHmhvDBhFgA1VTW29VBivoX2XQzIw9LpBJ32WaMn5PFCELDmO4jOevlzfE 6os1thaKyBCIglQJfVCmEaVEC5zYCUMiL88MbnP5h+H4a7Qbc7iQRWr0ImbRDp6un5 yyaKO68bT09ElGh3xypa6JuejeAnzy9dlNsDIwgQ= Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 19:55:06 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Dan Scally Cc: Sakari Ailus , Andy Shevchenko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux.walleij@linaro.org, prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com, heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com, kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com, jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org, robh@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, pmladek@suse.com, mchehab@kernel.org, tian.shu.qiu@intel.com, bingbu.cao@intel.com, yong.zhi@intel.com, rafael@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, kitakar@gmail.com, dan.carpenter@oracle.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 7/9] ipu3-cio2: Check if pci_dev->dev's fwnode is a software_node in cio2_parse_firmware() and set FWNODE_GRAPH_DEVICE_DISABLED if so Message-ID: <20201024165506.GB3943@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20201019225903.14276-1-djrscally@gmail.com> <20201019225903.14276-8-djrscally@gmail.com> <20201020091958.GC4077@smile.fi.intel.com> <20201020120615.GV13341@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <32bbb4db-17d7-b9d1-950f-8f29d67539c3@gmail.com> <20201020224910.GB2703@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <20201024003955.GS5979@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20201024142907.GB26150@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org Hi Dan, On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 05:33:32PM +0100, Dan Scally wrote: > On 24/10/2020 15:29, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 03:39:55AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 01:49:10AM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:56:07PM +0100, Dan Scally wrote: > >>>> On 20/10/2020 13:06, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:19:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 11:59:01PM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote: > >>>>>>> fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id() will optionally parse enabled devices > >>>>>>> only; that status being determined through the .device_is_available() op > >>>>>>> of the device's fwnode. As software_nodes don't have that operation and > >>>>>>> adding it is meaningless, we instead need to check if the device's fwnode > >>>>>>> is a software_node and if so pass the appropriate flag to disable that > >>>>>>> check > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Period. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm wondering if actually this can be hidden in fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(). > >>>>> > >>>>> The device availability test is actually there for a reason. Some firmware > >>>>> implementations put all the potential devices in the tables and only one > >>>>> (of some) of them are available. > >>>>> > >>>>> Could this be implemented so that if the node is a software node, then get > >>>>> its parent and then see if that is available? > >>>>> > >>>>> I guess that could be implemented in software node ops. Any opinions? > >>>> > >>>> Actually when considering the cio2 device, it seems that > >>>> set_secondary_fwnode() actually overwrites the _primary_, given > >>>> fwnode_is_primary(dev->fwnode) returns false. So in at least some cases, > >>>> this wouldn't work. > >>> > >>> Ouch. I wonder when this happens --- have you checked what's the primary > >>> there? I guess it might be if it's a PCI device without the corresponding > >>> ACPI device node? > >>> > >>> I remember you had an is_available implementation that just returned true > >>> for software nodes in an early version of the set? I think it would still > >>> be a lesser bad in this case. > >> > >> How about the following ? > > > > Looks good to me. > > If we're agreed on this (and it's fine by me too), do you want me to > include it in the next set, or are you going to do it separately Laurent? Feel free to include it in the next version, but I can send a patch if you prefer. > >> diff --git a/drivers/base/property.c b/drivers/base/property.c > >> index 81bd01ed4042..ea44ba846299 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/base/property.c > >> +++ b/drivers/base/property.c > >> @@ -706,9 +706,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_handle_put); > >> /** > >> * fwnode_device_is_available - check if a device is available for use > >> * @fwnode: Pointer to the fwnode of the device. > >> + * > >> + * For fwnode node types that don't implement the .device_is_available() > >> + * operation, such as software nodes, this function returns true. > >> */ > >> bool fwnode_device_is_available(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) > >> { > >> + if (!fwnode_has_op(fwnode, device_is_available)) > >> + return true; > >> return fwnode_call_bool_op(fwnode, device_is_available); > >> } > >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_device_is_available); -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart