[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUp8vu1zUzBTz6WP@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 02:45:50 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"Cc: Android Kernel" <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] driver core: fw_devlink: Add support for
FWNODE_FLAG_NEEDS_CHILD_BOUND_ON_ADD
> Wait, what's the difference between a real fix vs a long term fix? To
> me those are the same.
Maybe the long term fix is you follow the phandle to the actual
resources, see it is present, and allow the probe? That brings you in
line with how things actually work with devices probing against
resources.
I don't know how much work that is, since there is no uniform API to
follow a phandle to a resource. I think each phandle type has its own
helper. For an interrupt phandle you need to use of_irq_get(), for a
gpio phandle maybe of_get_named_gpio_flags(), for a reset phandle
__of_reset_control_get(), etc.
Because this does not sounds too simple, maybe you can find something
simpler which is a real fix for now, good enough that it will get
merged, and then you can implement this phandle following for the long
term fix?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists