[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=McsbAirEYjoo455mbKU495VEvPmMEqBmZCq2hw113YHOg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 12:16:52 +0200
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] reset: always include RESET_GPIO driver if possible
On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 4:28 PM Wolfram Sang
<wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Geert,
>
> > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
>
> Thank you!
>
> > This does mean RESET_GPIO will never be modular anymore, while it could
> > still work as a module (the reset core creates the platform device,
> > which can be probed later), albeit in a non-intuitive way.
>
> Interesting topic. In fact, I think we should make RESET_GPIO bool. I
> think the fallback mechanism of the core should work without any module
> loading infrastructure. It should be there whenever possible.
>
You have not said *why*. How is this different from any other device
whose driver is only loaded when actually needed?
Bartosz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists