Re: [PATCH RFT] driver core: faux: allow to set the firmware node for a faux device

[Shivendra Pratap <shivendra.pratap@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 06-03-2026 19:54, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2026 at 3:13 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 03:07:03PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2026 at 2:54 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
>>> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 02:45:56PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>>> Add a new variant of faux_device_create() taking a firmware node handle
>>>>> as argument and attaching it to the created faux device. This allows
>>>>> users to define and read device properties using the standard property
>>>>> accessors.
>>>>
>>>> Why would a faux device have firmware backing?  Doesn't that mean it
>>>> should be a platform device?
>>>>
>>>>> While at it: order includes in faux.c alphabetically for easier
>>>>> maintenance.
>>>>
>>>> Hint, that should be a separate patch, and is never something that I
>>>> enforce or require in .c files I maintain :)
>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Hi Shivendra et al!
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch is related to my response to your reboot-mode patch[1].
>>>>>
>>>>> You should be able to use the new function like:
>>>>>
>>>>>    faux_device_create_full("psci-reboot-mode", NULL, NULL, NULL, of_fwnode_handle(np));
>>>>
>>>> What is the fwnode handle here for?  Why is it required at all?  What
>>>> resources are involved that would want this?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Shivendra creates a faux device that registers with the reboot-mode
>>> subsystem which reads the reboot-mode definitions from devicetree. The
>>> faux device needs to have the "reboot-mode" OF-node attached. In his
>>> current proposal, Shivenda had to bypass faux device's probe() because
>>> he can't have the fwnode attached before probe() is called.
>>
>> Why would a firmware device be attached to a faux device?  A firmware
>> device is, implicitly, already part of the firmware "device tree", so
>> there should be something for it to be a child of already in the system.
>>
> 
> Shivendra: I rememeber there was an issue with using any proper
> devices like platform or auxiliary with this but - as the series is
> already at v20 - I can't find the actual discussion. Could you please
> describe what the issue with driver matching was?

reboot-mode node is a property of psci which defines the reboot 
commands.‌ As its not an actual device we wanted to avoid creating 
platform or aux device. few references here:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/rz7tnl5gg73gtyij3kmwk6hubikfsvu3krekjkpoofpdio6cwe@innio7qvotye/

Till v17, we were exposing an explicit of_node based registration in 
reboot mode and then registering it from psci driver.
Post this, Lorenzo suggested to move this outside of psci and use a faux 
device instead.

thanks,
Shivendra