[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZdXxNFB8bMMFPoki@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:48:52 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] driver core: Move fw_devlink stuff to where it
belongs
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 06:08:56PM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 8:10 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > A few APIs that belong specifically to the fw_devlink APIs
> > - are exposed to others without need
> > - prevents device property code to be cleaned up in the future
> >
> > Resolve this mess by moving fw_devlink code to where it belongs
> > and hide from others.
..
> The rest of the functions here are related to parents and children of
> a fwnode. So, why is this function considered to be in the wrong
> place?
When devlink was added it made a few fields in struct fwnode_handle.
These fields have no common grounds with device properties. In particular
struct device pointer is solely for devlinks and shouldn't be used with
them. Hence this patch. TL;DR: they semantically do _not_ belong to
the device property APIs.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists