[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MdA0e8=aFuy-zsbFJg+BcRGb23ZBqaMib1mi4r-iK85FQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 12:05:55 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Val Packett <val@...kett.cool>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reset: gpio: add a devlink between reset-gpio and its consumer
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:38 AM Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > > > + consumer = get_dev_from_fwnode(of_fwnode_handle(np));
> > >
> > > If called via __reset_control_get(), this just reconstructs the device
> > > from dev->of_node. I think it would be better to move the linking into
> > > __reset_control_get() and use the passed in consumer device directly.
> > >
> >
> > That would affect all users, do we want this? In most cases they will
> > already have a link with different flags. I don't think this is
> > correct.
>
> Right. We could also pass an optional dev into __of_reset_control_get()
> and then just go
>
> if (gpio_fallback)
> device_link_add(dev, rcdev->dev, DL_FLAG_STATELESS);
>
> at the end.
I think I'll do the conversion to fwnode first and see about adding
this next. I'm facing a different issue that may make it harder to use
devlinks in gpiolib-shared than I expected.
Let's leave this for now.
Bart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists