From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Daniel Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] software node: allow referencing firmware nodes
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 11:49:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aQh6n2XuI0oayg2g@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251103-reset-gpios-swnodes-v4-3-6461800b6775@linaro.org>
On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 10:35:23AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>
> At the moment software nodes can only reference other software nodes.
> This is a limitation for devices created, for instance, on the auxiliary
> bus with a dynamic software node attached which cannot reference devices
> the firmware node of which is "real" (as an OF node or otherwise).
>
> Make it possible for a software node to reference all firmware nodes in
> addition to static software nodes. To that end: add a second pointer to
> struct software_node_ref_args of type struct fwnode_handle. The core
> swnode code will first check the swnode pointer and if it's NULL, it
> will assume the fwnode pointer should be set. Rework the helper macros
> and deprecate the existing ones whose names don't indicate the reference
> type.
>
> Software node graphs remain the same, as in: the remote endpoints still
> have to be software nodes.
...
> + /*
> + * A software node can reference other software nodes or firmware
> + * nodes (which are the abstraction layer sitting on top of them).
> + * This is done to ensure we can create references to static software
> + * nodes before they're registered with the firmware node framework.
> + * At the time the reference is being resolved, we expect the swnodes
> + * in question to already have been registered and to be backed by
> + * a firmware node. This is why we use the fwnode API below to read the
A nit-pick (since anyway it requires a new version): move 'the' to the next
line to make them more equal in the length.
> + * relevant properties and bump the reference count.
> + */
...
> -#define SOFTWARE_NODE_REFERENCE(_ref_, ...) \
> +#define __SOFTWARE_NODE_REF(_ref, ...) \
No, NAK. The renaming of the parameters is not related to this change _at all_.
Why do you change established style here? Did I miss your answer to my question
in the previous rounds?
> (const struct software_node_ref_args) { \
> - .node = _ref_, \
> + .swnode = _Generic(_ref, \
> + const struct software_node *: _ref, \
> + default: NULL), \
> + .fwnode = _Generic(_ref, \
> + struct fwnode_handle *: _ref, \
> + default: NULL), \
> .nargs = COUNT_ARGS(__VA_ARGS__), \
> .args = { __VA_ARGS__ }, \
> }
...
> +#define SOFTWARE_NODE_REF_SWNODE(_ref, ...) \
> + __SOFTWARE_NODE_REF(_ref, __VA_ARGS__)
> +
> +#define SOFTWARE_NODE_REF_FWNODE(_ref, ...) \
> + __SOFTWARE_NODE_REF(_ref, __VA_ARGS__)
> +
> +/* DEPRECATED, use SOFTWARE_NODE_REF_SWNODE() instead. */
> +#define SOFTWARE_NODE_REFERENCE(_ref, ...) \
> + SOFTWARE_NODE_REF_SWNODE(_ref, __VA_ARGS__)
Now, useless.
...
> -#define PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF(_name_, _ref_, ...) \
> +#define __PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF(_type, _name, _ref, ...) \
> (struct property_entry) { \
> - .name = _name_, \
> + .name = _name, \
> .length = sizeof(struct software_node_ref_args), \
> .type = DEV_PROP_REF, \
> - { .pointer = &SOFTWARE_NODE_REFERENCE(_ref_, ##__VA_ARGS__), }, \
> + { .pointer = &_type(_ref, ##__VA_ARGS__), }, \
> }
Do we need this now? I assume that _Generic() takes case of this.
...
> +#define PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_SWNODE(_name, _ref, ...) \
> + __PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF(SOFTWARE_NODE_REF_SWNODE, \
> + _name, _ref, __VA_ARGS__)
> +
> +#define PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_FWNODE(_name, _ref, ...) \
> + __PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF(SOFTWARE_NODE_REF_FWNODE, \
> + _name, _ref, __VA_ARGS__)
> +
> +/* DEPRECATED, use PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_SWNODE() instead. */
> +#define PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF(_name, _ref, ...) \
> + PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_SWNODE(_name, _ref, __VA_ARGS__)
Seems like useless churn.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-03 9:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-03 9:35 [PATCH v4 00/10] reset: rework reset-gpios handling Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 01/10] software node: read the reference args via the fwnode API Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 10:53 ` Sakari Ailus
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 02/10] software node: increase the reference of the swnode by its fwnode Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 10:53 ` Sakari Ailus
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 03/10] software node: allow referencing firmware nodes Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:49 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2025-11-03 10:36 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 10:52 ` Sakari Ailus
2025-11-03 10:56 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 13:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 04/10] gpio: swnode: don't use the swnode's name as the key for GPIO lookup Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-11-03 10:53 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-18 16:33 ` Charles Keepax
2025-11-18 18:01 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-18 18:15 ` Charles Keepax
2025-11-18 18:23 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-11-19 8:35 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-19 8:41 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-19 9:13 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-02-09 6:44 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2026-02-09 6:52 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2026-02-09 12:38 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-02-09 13:25 ` Yauhen Kharuzhy
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 05/10] gpio: swnode: allow referencing GPIO chips by firmware nodes Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:54 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 06/10] gpio: swnode: update the property definitions Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:57 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 07/10] reset: order includes alphabetically in reset/core.c Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 08/10] reset: make the provider of reset-gpios the parent of the reset device Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 09/10] reset: gpio: convert the driver to using the auxiliary bus Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 9:35 ` [PATCH v4 10/10] reset: gpio: use software nodes to setup the GPIO lookup Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-11-03 14:14 ` (subset) [PATCH v4 00/10] reset: rework reset-gpios handling Bartosz Golaszewski
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=aQh6n2XuI0oayg2g@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org \
--cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=djrscally@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=krzk@kernel.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=p.zabel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.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®