From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mfd: arizona: Update device tree regulator bindings
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 18:52:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130929175236.GV19304@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130929141137.GW3635@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1339 bytes --]
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 03:11:37PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
> There is currently only one other MFD driver (tps65910) which defines
> the GPIOs on the main MFD node as we do in the Arizona driver and it
> uses the 'hack' that I suggested in my first email of copying the
> of_node.
> tps65910_gpio->gpio_chip.of_node = tps65910->dev->of_node;
Look where it's copying it to - this isn't the hack you were suggesting
before. What you were suggesting before was setting the of_node of the
child struct device which is a managed thing that the driver core knows
about, the device is the owner of the of_node hanging off it. You would
end up with the same of_node referenced from two struct devices which
isn't clever. The above is putting a pointer into the gpio_chip which
is just telling gpiolib that it should use this of_node when it needs
one, gpiolib won't try and lifecycle manage the of_node.
> Looking around there seem to be quite a few drivers that copy
> of_node pointers like this are we sure this isn't an acceptable
> solution? I mean the arizona driver we know the components will
> always be loaded as part of the MFD and thus will be freed before
> the parent node.
It's fine to reference an of_node, that's obviously something that will
need to happen at some point in order to do anything useful with the
data.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-29 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-25 17:47 Charles Keepax
2013-09-25 18:32 ` Mark Brown
2013-09-26 15:29 ` Charles Keepax
2013-09-26 17:58 ` Mark Brown
2013-09-28 15:53 ` Charles Keepax
2013-09-28 22:55 ` Mark Brown
2013-09-29 14:11 ` Charles Keepax
2013-09-29 17:52 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2013-09-29 18:09 ` Charles Keepax
2013-10-10 11:21 ` Lee Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130929175236.GV19304@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®