From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0B431DED49; Fri, 20 Feb 2026 07:42:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771573326; cv=none; b=oge0QHDICYgWBGg0/Xxj0QN8Z78wBIWrIWeQHw3sugZ/oFZ4drBOheXYGMzP8IIEfrBEdk4CcTnJQ5XahpxqEYtLiIWVs7cpCom5pBwRUDZPCKE+C4P9cZ4h/pFYlPg98lEnrcTsx9WVhq9VNPZPWHOAZV70vy5WRyOGKLpU2Ek= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771573326; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9d/ClPWa9fqFfMxzzKN52248saUlN4dnIib8GrzZ14o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=hZiLX9Qt7lC7MQv1LM5Bv7eJwTl50RyHcwVW0pst+jyhCZEmMC6nj+5IyQNETV4eZ29HKxHP01jcosadM9GseS/F8EfxcteDdJ/38qkC7urxwL2DzFG7E+gsdRkQbqe1szTuwEUH2B6pTbenGEffuXZmwkEZ9CQqoHOQfhGhCRM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=dfH/ImPW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="dfH/ImPW" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1771573326; x=1803109326; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=9d/ClPWa9fqFfMxzzKN52248saUlN4dnIib8GrzZ14o=; b=dfH/ImPWlwiA+rtfAelVR0j07EgtldWpBcHUcqOstWJLfqXbEGb08xZ3 Upm/yeUDnlSdCGKVtwX321MTSJ1YiBX1eeNrHXVmFvke5puHzc1INZOc7 p3GWSCNebTevEomTepm7RsNjZyb6ycgT9nP7eqecLtfmNQwveGZAnRVuJ 51yTtonJQd/b+RJCmQtMFZb/d87FFT4bJnaAM5yE4Z0v2Ev07MQX8a8Sh F9eqMlfxi61JC/hHd9+JI194ow01zj/Pv5y4f9ITzgjArkbmD0bo84yzC BRm79jQzQp0voHBm7eIDrcz+wGQq9h1Pxe0dfF0dSoOVUQ4cYEMUdQqwe A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Nb4tajebTsSvFRQy3ohz6A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: VXlxibsASouDkBpL/qL84g== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11706"; a="76281186" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,301,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="76281186" Received: from orviesa006.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.146]) by orvoesa107.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Feb 2026 23:42:06 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: +DaGzeM4TgGHKy4J7uvGbg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: inBFgepiSCCKnWddEakdbg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,301,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="213890279" Received: from pgcooper-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.25]) by orviesa006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Feb 2026 23:42:03 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2026 09:42:00 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Bartosz Golaszewski Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Bartosz Golaszewski , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linus Walleij , Dmitry Torokhov , driver-core@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, Danilo Krummrich Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] driver core: provide device_match_fwnode_ext() Message-ID: References: <20260219-device-match-secondary-fwnode-v1-0-a64e8d4754bc@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260219-device-match-secondary-fwnode-v1-1-a64e8d4754bc@oss.qualcomm.com> <2026021900-trekker-twenty-9daa@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 03:18:24PM -0600, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 20:27:51 +0100, Andy Shevchenko > said: > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 05:55:20PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > >> On Thu Feb 19, 2026 at 5:39 PM CET, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: ... > >> Also, is there a reason why we need both device_match_fwnode() *and* > >> device_match_fwnode_ext()? > > > > Yes. We don't want (at least for now) to dive into bug hunting in a 2+ years > > horizon if something goes wrong with [currently] working drivers that use > > device_match_fwnode() against the cases when there are primary and secondary > > fwnodes present. > > > > I won't put my bet that extending device_match_fwnode() won't break anything. > > And I don't want to invest (waste?) my time to learn each of the existing cases. > > > > The proposed way is robust and safest. And for the record, I will be the first > > person to push back device_match_fwnode() upgrade without a comprehensive testing > > on real (affected) HW. > > Who's got the final word here? I responded to Danilo's email saying I can fold > the new code into the existing function but you are against it. Of course I am not a maintainer, but as I said, I will be not okay without proven tests on the real HW. It's non-trivial change as it may lead to a problematic behaviour that one may not observe immediately (it might affect 1 out of 100s platforms). So, it will be hidden till unknown point in time in the future. I prefer safest way. And then we can convert case-by-case without hurry, which is the usual cause of the subtle bugs. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko