From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752760AbdDCO14 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 10:27:56 -0400 Received: from metis.ext.4.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:53587 "EHLO metis.ext.4.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750777AbdDCO1z (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 10:27:55 -0400 Message-ID: <1491229671.2378.73.camel@pengutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] reset: Make optional stuff optional for all users From: Philipp Zabel To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mika Westerberg , Ramiro Oliveira Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 16:27:51 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20170403122638.88263-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> References: <20170403122638.88263-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:67c:670:100:3ad5:47ff:feaf:1a17 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: p.zabel@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Andy, thank you for the patch. On Mon, 2017-04-03 at 15:26 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > There is Device Tree oriented check for optional resource. Of course > it will fail on non-DT platforms. > > Remove this check to make things optional for all users. > > Fixes: bb475230b8e5 ("reset: make optional functions really optional") > Cc: Ramiro Oliveira > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko > --- > > The reset framework is too Device Tree oriented, and who knows what > the logic was behind the commit which introduced devm_reset_*() > functions without thinking out of the DT box. At the time, there was nothing outside of the box to describe reset lines, and as far as I am aware there still isn't, so the devm_reset_* should behave as if the reset line is not specified in the non-DT case. Returning -EINVAL was reasonable in that case, before the API was changed to describe unavailable, optional reset controls as rstc = NULL. > This commit fixes almost all Intel newest boards that have no legacy > UART since UART driver started using this DT-centric framework. Is this is about 8250_dw.c? Unfortunately it sometimes takes a little while for me to get updated on the big picture, as I only get the actual reset driver and framework patches in my inbox. Usually I only see the reset consumer changes when I actively look for them. But the fault in this case was is with me not considering all possible code paths influenced by commit bb475230b8e5, in the configurations that I can't test myself. > drivers/reset/core.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/reset/core.c b/drivers/reset/core.c > index f1e5e65388bb..62314e663f29 100644 > --- a/drivers/reset/core.c > +++ b/drivers/reset/core.c > @@ -331,9 +331,6 @@ struct reset_control *__of_reset_control_get(struct device_node *node, Ideally, __of_reset_control_get would not be called at all in the non-DT case. I'll change that in the next round, but for now I'd prefer a small fix in place. > int rstc_id; > int ret; > > - if (!node) > - return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > - This should be if (!node) return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); instead. Can you confirm this works for Intel boards with DW UART? I can fix it up when applying if you agree. > if (id) { > index = of_property_match_string(node, > "reset-names", id); regards Philipp