[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240408144335.5e9b6a2b@bootlin.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:43:35 +0200
From: Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
<rafael@...nel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Lizhi Hou
<lizhi.hou@....com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Max Zhen <max.zhen@....com>, Sonal Santan <sonal.santan@....com>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...inx.com>, Jonathan Cameron
<Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, Krzysztof Wilczyński
<kwilczynski@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Allan Nielsen <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>,
Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>, Steen Hegelund
<steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>, Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Attach DT nodes to existing PCI devices
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:39:13 +0100
Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The commit 407d1a51921e ("PCI: Create device tree node for bridge")
> creates of_node for PCI devices.
>
> During the insertion handling of these new DT nodes done by of_platform,
> new devices (struct device) are created. For each PCI devices a struct
> device is already present (created and handled by the PCI core).
>
> Creating a new device from a DT node leads to some kind of wrong struct
> device duplication to represent the exact same PCI device.
>
> This patch series first introduces device_{add,remove}_of_node() in
> order to add or remove a newly created of_node to an already existing
> device. Then it fixes the DT node creation for PCI devices to add or
> remove the created node to the existing PCI device without any new
> device creation.
>
> Compared to the previous iteration:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231130165700.685764-1-herve.codina@bootlin.com/
> this v3 series rewrap commit log.
>
> The potential issue related to the sysfs of_node symlink added after the
> sysfs PCI device is visible from user-space (raised during the v2
> review) is maybe not a problem according to Bjorn:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240319165430.GA1233494@bhelgaas/
>
> IMHO, the discussions started with Rob around the interrupt-controller
> during the v2 review are out of the issue this specific series tries to
> fix. Some modifications are needed for the interrupt-controller topic
> but should be done in a specific series.
>
> Best regards,
> Hervé
>
I have received no feedback on this v3 series.
I know maintainers are busy but I would like to be sure that this series was
not simply missed.
Best regards,
Hervé
Powered by blists - more mailing lists