From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Yunus Bas <Y.Bas@phytec.de>,
"stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com" <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: mfd-core: Change "Failed to locate of_node" warning to debug
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 13:33:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YNxktsFmlzLcn4+Y@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210630105557.eaktwdz5p6yzuron@maple.lan>
On Wed, 30 Jun 2021, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 07:27:32AM +0000, Yunus Bas wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, dem 29.06.2021 um 14:39 +0100 schrieb Lee Jones:
> > > On Tue, 29 Jun 2021, Yunus Bas wrote:
> > > > Interestingly, all subdevices defined in the driver are registered
> > > > as platform devices from the MFD framework, regardless of a
> > > > devicetree entry or not. The preceding code checks the subdevice
> > > > cells with an additional compatible. In case a device has no
> > > > devicetree entry, an irritating failed-message is printed on the
> > > > display. I'm not sure if this was the intention but the framework
> > > > somehow forces the users to describe all subdevices of an MFD. I
> > > > think the info print is not needed. It makes more sense to set it
> > > > as a debug print.
> > >
> > > Actually, this has served to highlight that your DTS is not correct.
> > >
> > > Why are some devices represented in DT and some aren't?
> > >
> > > If anything, I'm tempted to upgrade the info() print to warn().
> >
> > Imagine only required parts of the MFD is connected to the designed
> > system and unrequired parts are not. In that case, fully describing the
> > MFD in the devicetree wouldn't represent the system at all.
>
> To describe hardware that is present but unused we would normally use
> status = "disabled".
>
> So if, for example, your board cannot use the RTC for some reason
> (perhaps the board has no 32KHz oscillator?) then the DA9062 still
> contains the hardware but it is useless. Such hardware could be
> described as:
>
> da9062_rtc: rtc {
> compatible = "dlg,da9062-rtc";
> status = "disabled";
> }
>
> Is this sufficient to suppress the warnings when the hardware is not
> fully described?
>
> There is almost certainly a problem here since there is a mismatch
> between mfd-core and the DA9062 DT bindings. mfd-core warns when the
> hardware description is incomplete and the DA9062 (and generic mfd) DT
> bindings are ambiguous about whether sub-nodes are mandatory and include
> an example that contains missing compatibles rather than disabled nodes
> like the above.
>
> However it is not entirely clear to me at this point whether this should
> be fixed in mfd-core or by improving the bindings documentation.
Right. This is a potential solution.
NB: The suggestion above is usually the default for devices (at least
this was the case back when I was neck deep in DT). You usually have
the a device specified in a DTSI file with the generic properties
defined from within a top-level node which is usually disabled. Then
you link back to that node (usually with a &) from within your DTS
file where you provide platform specific properties and override the
status to 'okay' or what have you.
However before I provide any further assistance, I really want to get
an idea of the H/W you're working with. Is this a reduced function
DA9062? Or is the functionality actually present, you just don't want
to make use of it?
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-30 12:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-16 8:19 [PATCH] mfd: mfd-core: Change "Failed to locate of_node" warning to debug Yunus Bas
2021-06-16 9:03 ` Lee Jones
2021-06-17 7:46 ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-17 8:27 ` Lee Jones
2021-06-29 7:25 ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-29 9:07 ` Lee Jones
2021-06-29 9:41 ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-29 13:39 ` Lee Jones
2021-06-30 7:27 ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-30 8:42 ` Lee Jones
2021-06-30 10:55 ` Daniel Thompson
2021-06-30 12:33 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2021-07-01 15:34 ` Yunus Bas
2021-07-01 16:45 ` Lee Jones
2021-07-02 12:59 ` Daniel Thompson
2021-07-02 18:36 ` Lee Jones
2021-07-02 19:10 ` Daniel Thompson
2021-07-05 7:24 ` Yunus Bas
2021-07-05 7:31 ` Lee Jones
2021-07-05 7:50 ` Yunus Bas
2021-07-05 8:05 ` Lee Jones
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=YNxktsFmlzLcn4+Y@dell \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=Y.Bas@phytec.de \
--cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com \
/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).