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=-11.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 5844BC43464 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 07:35:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE6521973 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 07:35:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726646AbgIRHfZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2020 03:35:25 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48118 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726040AbgIRHfY (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2020 03:35:24 -0400 Received: from hillosipuli.retiisi.org.uk (hillosipuli.retiisi.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:4f9:c010:4572::81:2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A982C06174A; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 00:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from valkosipuli.localdomain (valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:4f9:c010:4572::80:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hillosipuli.retiisi.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFEEA634C87; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:34:32 +0300 (EEST) Received: from sailus by valkosipuli.localdomain with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kJAuf-00024n-2w; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:34:33 +0300 Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:34:33 +0300 From: Sakari Ailus To: Dan Scally Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, jorhand@linux.microsoft.com, kitakar@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] software_node: Add support for fwnode_graph*() family of functions Message-ID: <20200918073433.GR834@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> References: <20200915232827.3416-1-djrscally@gmail.com> <20200916091707.GL834@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <7b81d743-736d-62d1-7072-d08759a0d5d7@gmail.com> <20200918062237.GP834@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <294db5cf-4c95-d56c-0a42-60ca95393c06@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <294db5cf-4c95-d56c-0a42-60ca95393c06@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 07:49:31AM +0100, Dan Scally wrote: > Good morning > > On 18/09/2020 07:22, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 02:22:10PM +0100, Dan Scally wrote: > >> Hi Sakari - thanks for the comments > >> > >> On 16/09/2020 10:17, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>> Moi Daniel and Heikki, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 12:28:27AM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote: > >>>> From: Heikki Krogerus > >>>> > >>>> This implements the remaining .graph_* callbacks in the > >>>> fwnode operations vector for the software nodes. That makes > >>>> the fwnode_graph*() functions available in the drivers also > >>>> when software nodes are used. > >>>> > >>>> The implementation tries to mimic the "OF graph" as much as > >>>> possible, but there is no support for the "reg" device > >>>> property. The ports will need to have the index in their > >>>> name which starts with "port" (for example "port0", "port1", > >>>> ...) and endpoints will use the index of the software node > >>>> that is given to them during creation. The port nodes can > >>>> also be grouped under a specially named "ports" subnode, > >>>> just like in DT, if necessary. > >>>> > >>>> The remote-endpoints are reference properties under the > >>>> endpoint nodes that are named "remote-endpoint". > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus > >>>> Co-developed-by: Daniel Scally > >>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally > >>>> --- > >>>> changes in v2: > >>>> - added software_node_device_is_available > >>>> - altered software_node_get_next_child to get references > >>>> - altered software_node_get_next_endpoint to release references > >>>> to ports and avoid passing invalid combinations of swnodes to > >>>> software_node_get_next_child > >>>> - altered swnode_graph_find_next_port to release port rather than > >>>> old > >>>> > >>>> drivers/base/swnode.c | 129 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >>>> 1 file changed, 127 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/swnode.c b/drivers/base/swnode.c > >>>> index 010828fc785b..d69034b807e3 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/base/swnode.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/base/swnode.c > >>>> @@ -363,6 +363,11 @@ static void software_node_put(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) > >>>> kobject_put(&swnode->kobj); > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> +static bool software_node_device_is_available(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + return is_software_node(fwnode); > >>> This basically tells whether the device is there. Are there software node > >>> based devices, i.e. do you need this? > >>> > >>> If you do really need this, then I guess this could just return true for > >>> now as if you somehow get here, the node is a software node anyway. > >> I do think its better to include it; I'm targeting using this with > >> ipu3-cio2; the cio2_parse_firmware() call there doesn't pass > >> FWNODE_GRAPH_DEVICE_DISABLED to fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id() so > > I wonder if this has something to do with replacing the device's fwnode > > in the cio2-bridge patch. > > > > It's the device that needs to be enabled, and it's not a software node. > > > I think it is because of that yes, but I don't see a way around it at > the moment - unless there's a way to attach the software_node port and > endpoints that cio2-bridge creates to the device's existing firmware > instead. I thought this was how it was meant to be used? The secondary field is there for this purpose. But it may be not all fwnode interface functions operate on fwnode->secondary? -- Regards, Sakari Ailus