Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <b8ec04dc-f803-ee2c-29b7-b0311eb8c5fb@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Jun 2022 15:08:33 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Subject: Re: fwnode_for_each_child_node() and OF backend discrepancy
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>
Cc:     linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <4e1d5db9dea68d82c94336a1d6aac404@walle.cc>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <4e1d5db9dea68d82c94336a1d6aac404@walle.cc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 27/06/2022 14:49, Michael Walle wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I tired to iterate over all child nodes, regardless if they are 
> available
> or not. Now there is that handy fwnode_for_each_child_node() (and the
> fwnode_for_each_available_child_node()). The only thing is the OF 
> backend
> already skips disabled nodes [1], making fwnode_for_each_child_node() 
> and
> fwnode_for_each_available_child_node() behave the same with the OF 
> backend.
> 
> Doesn't seem to be noticed by anyone for now. I'm not sure how to fix 
> that
> one. fwnode_for_each_child_node() and also fwnode_get_next_child_node() 
> are
> used by a handful of drivers. I've looked at some, but couldn't decide
> whether they really want to iterate over all child nodes or just the 
> enabled
> ones.

If I get it correctly, this was introduced  by 8a0662d9ed29 ("Driver
core: Unified interface for firmware node properties")
.

The question to Rafael - what was your intention when you added
device_get_next_child_node() looking only for available nodes?

My understanding is that this implementation should be consistent with
OF implementation, so fwnode_get_next_child_node=get any child.

However maybe ACPI treats it somehow differently?

Best regards,
Krzysztof