From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
        Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com>,
        David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi, property: Export acpi_dev_prop_read_single call.
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:45:46 +0200
Message-ID: <4911699.HQai7ImI9T@vostro.rjw.lan>
User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/4.1.0-rc5+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <1501387.bDOHyjjWvt@vostro.rjw.lan>
References: <1438729319-9146-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <55C26EB9.7010504@gmail.com> <1501387.bDOHyjjWvt@vostro.rjw.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2343
Lines: 61

On Thursday, August 06, 2015 01:23:06 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 05, 2015 01:14:49 PM David Daney wrote:
> > On 08/05/2015 10:26 AM, David Daney wrote:
> > > On 08/05/2015 06:43 AM, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> > >> On 05.08.2015 15:48, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >>> On Tuesday, August 04, 2015 04:01:59 PM David Daney wrote:
> > >>>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Fixes the following build error when building drivers as modules:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>   ERROR: "acpi_dev_prop_read_single" [drivers/net/phy/mdio-octeon.ko]
> > >>>> undefined!
> > >>>>   ERROR: "acpi_dev_prop_read_single"
> > >>>> [drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/thunder/thunder_bgx.ko] undefined!
> > >>>
> > >>> Can you please tell me why the drivers in question use that function
> > >>> directly, although they aren't supposed to?
> > >>>
> > >>> Clearly, their authors had not tried to build them as modules or they
> > >>> would have noticed the problem at the development stage already.
> > >>>
> > >>> What would be wrong with using the generic device properties API
> > >>> instead?
> > >>>
> > >> Yes, you are right. We should use:
> > >> int device_property_read_u64_array(struct device *dev, const char
> > >> *propname, u64 *val, size_t nval);
> > >>
> > >
> > > Thanks all, for the review and suggestions.  We we try the suggested
> > > approach and see how it goes...
> > >
> > 
> > Actually I don't think device_property_read_u64_array() will work.
> > 
> > We are traversing a reference to a different acpi_device via 
> > acpi_dev_get_property_reference(),
> 
> Why?
> 
> > so there is no struct device * 
> > available for a call to device_property_read_u64_array().  This looks 
> > like a deficiency in the device_property_* framework, so for the time 
> > being I guess we will call acpi_dev_get_property(), which is exported, 
> > and decode the thing in the driver.
> 
> Please don't.
> 
> I'd like to understand what's missing.

Moreover, even if you have no struct device, you still can use
fwnode_property_read_u64_array(), can't you?

Thanks,
Rafael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/