[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdARCTnpEMyVRAWv7jVSj_+m8_xYiNTwmX6LCzpZT8Tuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 21:02:53 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.com>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] of: unittest: Switch to use fwnode instead of of_node
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 6:29 PM Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 02:50:09PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > GPIO library now accepts fwnode as a firmware node, so
> > switch the module to use it.
...
> > - devptr->chip.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > + devptr->chip.fwnode = dev_fwnode(&pdev->dev);
>
> Perhaps I want the DT test code to test using the of_node pointer. We do
> want that to work, right?
Nope. We want to get rid of of_node in GPIO.
> I'm really not a fan of fwnode'ifying things that are DT only. It's
> really pointless churn.
Other way around, keeping an of_node for just 3 drivers (and counting
down) + one test case is pointless churn.
But I got that commit message that is unclear about the intentions
behind. I will update that if you agree on the rest.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists