linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/9] reset: rework reset-gpios handling

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aR8ubexLrTgmxtpv@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 17:06:21 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
	David Rhodes <david.rhodes@...rus.com>,
	Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Maciej Strozek <mstrozek@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
	Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...nel.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, patches@...nsource.cirrus.com,
	linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
	stable+noautosel@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/9] reset: rework reset-gpios handling

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 02:23:55PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> Machine GPIO lookup is a nice, if a bit clunky, mechanism when we have
> absolutely no idea what the GPIO provider is or when it will be created.
> However in the case of reset-gpios, we not only know if the chip is
> there - we also already hold a reference to its firmware node.
> 
> In this case using fwnode lookup makes more sense. However, since the
> reset provider is created dynamically, it doesn't have a corresponding
> firmware node (in this case: an OF-node). That leaves us with software
> nodes which currently cannot reference other implementations of the
> fwnode API, only other struct software_node objects. This is a needless
> limitation as it's imaginable that a dynamic auxiliary device (with a
> software node attached) would want to reference a real device with an OF
> node.
> 
> This series does three things: extends the software node implementation,
> allowing its properties to reference not only static software nodes but
> also existing firmware nodes, updates the GPIO property interface to use
> the reworked swnode macros and finally makes the reset-gpio code the
> first user by converting the GPIO lookup from machine to swnode.
> 
> Another user of the software node changes in the future could become the
> shared GPIO modules that's in the works in parallel[1].
> 
> Merging strategy: the series is logically split into four parts: driver
> core, SPI, GPIO and reset respectively. However there are build-time
> dependencies between all three parts so I suggest the reset tree as the
> right one to take it upstream with an immutable branch provided to
> driver core, SPI and GPIO.

Solution seems still OF-centric (some of_* is in reset-gpio are left),
but the series in the right direction, thanks for doing this!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko