[PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Heikki Krogerus]

Hi,

It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.

Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
up anywhere.

I would imagine that it's OK to everybody if Greg takes these?

thanks,

Heikki Krogerus (2):
  ARM: tegra: paz00: Handle device properties with software node API
  driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

 arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c |  2 +-
 drivers/base/platform.c           | 20 ++------------------
 include/linux/platform_device.h   |  2 --
 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH 1/2] ARM: tegra: paz00: Handle device properties with software node API

[Heikki Krogerus]

The old device property API is going to be removed.
Replacing the device_add_properties() call with the software
node API equivalent, device_create_managed_software_node().

Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c
index b5c990a7a5af5..18d37f90cdfe3 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ static struct gpiod_lookup_table wifi_gpio_lookup = {
 
 void __init tegra_paz00_wifikill_init(void)
 {
-	platform_device_add_properties(&wifi_rfkill_device, wifi_rfkill_prop);
+	device_create_managed_software_node(&wifi_rfkill_device.dev, wifi_rfkill_prop, NULL);
 	gpiod_add_lookup_table(&wifi_gpio_lookup);
 	platform_device_register(&wifi_rfkill_device);
 }
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH 2/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Heikki Krogerus]

There are no more users for it. The last place where it's
called is in platform_device_register_full(). Replacing that
call with device_create_managed_software_node() and
removing the function.

Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/base/platform.c         | 20 ++------------------
 include/linux/platform_device.h |  2 --
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
index 9cd34def2237b..0299b03e64d40 100644
--- a/drivers/base/platform.c
+++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
@@ -661,22 +661,6 @@ int platform_device_add_data(struct platform_device *pdev, const void *data,
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(platform_device_add_data);
 
-/**
- * platform_device_add_properties - add built-in properties to a platform device
- * @pdev: platform device to add properties to
- * @properties: null terminated array of properties to add
- *
- * The function will take deep copy of @properties and attach the copy to the
- * platform device. The memory associated with properties will be freed when the
- * platform device is released.
- */
-int platform_device_add_properties(struct platform_device *pdev,
-				   const struct property_entry *properties)
-{
-	return device_add_properties(&pdev->dev, properties);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(platform_device_add_properties);
-
 /**
  * platform_device_add - add a platform device to device hierarchy
  * @pdev: platform device we're adding
@@ -862,8 +846,8 @@ struct platform_device *platform_device_register_full(
 		goto err;
 
 	if (pdevinfo->properties) {
-		ret = platform_device_add_properties(pdev,
-						     pdevinfo->properties);
+		ret = device_create_managed_software_node(&pdev->dev,
+							  pdevinfo->properties, NULL);
 		if (ret)
 			goto err;
 	}
diff --git a/include/linux/platform_device.h b/include/linux/platform_device.h
index cd81e060863c9..a05eb819f306a 100644
--- a/include/linux/platform_device.h
+++ b/include/linux/platform_device.h
@@ -200,8 +200,6 @@ extern int platform_device_add_resources(struct platform_device *pdev,
 					 unsigned int num);
 extern int platform_device_add_data(struct platform_device *pdev,
 				    const void *data, size_t size);
-extern int platform_device_add_properties(struct platform_device *pdev,
-				const struct property_entry *properties);
 extern int platform_device_add(struct platform_device *pdev);
 extern void platform_device_del(struct platform_device *pdev);
 extern void platform_device_put(struct platform_device *pdev);
-- 
2.30.2

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> 
> Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> up anywhere.

Cool!
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>

Btw, which base have you used for this series?

> I would imagine that it's OK to everybody if Greg takes these?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Heikki Krogerus (2):
>   ARM: tegra: paz00: Handle device properties with software node API
>   driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()
> 
>  arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-paz00.c |  2 +-
>  drivers/base/platform.c           | 20 ++------------------
>  include/linux/platform_device.h   |  2 --
>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.30.2
> 

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Heikki Krogerus]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:59:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> > function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> > 
> > Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> > the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> > up anywhere.
> 
> Cool!
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Btw, which base have you used for this series?

intel-next for this one.


-- 
heikki

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Heikki Krogerus]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:21:46PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:59:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> > > function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> > > 
> > > Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> > > the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> > > up anywhere.
> > 
> > Cool!
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Btw, which base have you used for this series?
> 
> intel-next for this one.

I mean linux-next :-)

-- 
heikki

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:30:57PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:21:46PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:59:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> > > > function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> > > > 
> > > > Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> > > > the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> > > > up anywhere.
> > > 
> > > Cool!
> > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Btw, which base have you used for this series?
> > 
> > intel-next for this one.
> 
> I mean linux-next :-)

Let's wait for CIs to respond. I have a feeling that the first patch is good
for v5.14, while the second one is probably for the next cycle.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:48:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:30:57PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:21:46PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:59:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> > > > > function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> > > > > the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> > > > > up anywhere.
> > > > 
> > > > Cool!
> > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Btw, which base have you used for this series?
> > > 
> > > intel-next for this one.
> > 
> > I mean linux-next :-)
> 
> Let's wait for CIs to respond. I have a feeling that the first patch is good
> for v5.14, while the second one is probably for the next cycle.

Why?  I can take both now, no problem...

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 2:40 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:48:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:30:57PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:21:46PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:59:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> > > > > > function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> > > > > > the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> > > > > > up anywhere.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cool!
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Btw, which base have you used for this series?
> > > >
> > > > intel-next for this one.
> > >
> > > I mean linux-next :-)
> >
> > Let's wait for CIs to respond. I have a feeling that the first patch is good
> > for v5.14, while the second one is probably for the next cycle.
>
> Why?  I can take both now, no problem...

Not really, there are dependencies, one in my tree ATM.

It's better if I take them IMHO.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: Remove platform_device_add_properties()

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:53:09PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 2:40 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:48:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:30:57PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:21:46PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:59:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30:44AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It looks like there is only one place left that still uses the
> > > > > > > function. Converting that last user and removing the thing.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Note, I'm actually resending the patch for board-paz00.c. I'm assuming
> > > > > > > the original patch slipped through the cracks because it did not end
> > > > > > > up anywhere.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cool!
> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Btw, which base have you used for this series?
> > > > >
> > > > > intel-next for this one.
> > > >
> > > > I mean linux-next :-)
> > >
> > > Let's wait for CIs to respond. I have a feeling that the first patch is good
> > > for v5.14, while the second one is probably for the next cycle.
> >
> > Why?  I can take both now, no problem...
> 
> Not really, there are dependencies, one in my tree ATM.
> 
> It's better if I take them IMHO.

Sure, feel free to:

Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>