Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-86916-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:23:01 +0100
Message-Id: <CZHNZJJ600CC.1WV7Q2520ZSKU@bootlin.com>
Cc: "Gregory CLEMENT" <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>, "Michael Turquette"
 <mturquette@baylibre.com>, "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@kernel.org>, "Rob Herring"
 <robh+dt@kernel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski"
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
 "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>, "Linus Walleij"
 <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, =?utf-8?q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?=
 <rafal@milecki.pl>, "Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>, "Vladimir
 Kondratiev" <vladimir.kondratiev@mobileye.com>,
 <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
 <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Thomas
 Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, "Tawfik Bayouk"
 <tawfik.bayouk@mobileye.com>, <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>
To: "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
From: =?utf-8?q?Th=C3=A9o_Lebrun?= <theo.lebrun@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/10] reset: eyeq5: add platform driver
References: <20240227-mbly-clk-v8-0-c57fbda7664a@bootlin.com>
 <20240227-mbly-clk-v8-4-c57fbda7664a@bootlin.com>
 <Zd4bbCsY54XEnvJM@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <CZGVIWR4H4DE.3M5H3H99X0QPT@bootlin.com>
 <ZeBo4N204gLO0eUd@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <CZHK1ZCSROM5.X4WYN7SAZJTH@bootlin.com>
 <ZeCLS17PhKPuGvkm@smile.fi.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZeCLS17PhKPuGvkm@smile.fi.intel.com>

Hello,

On Thu Feb 29, 2024 at 2:48 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 01:18:08PM +0100, Th=C3=A9o Lebrun wrote:
> > On Thu Feb 29, 2024 at 12:22 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 06:04:47PM +0100, Th=C3=A9o Lebrun wrote:
> > > > On Tue Feb 27, 2024 at 6:27 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 03:55:25PM +0100, Th=C3=A9o Lebrun wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > > > +	priv->rcdev.of_node =3D np;
> > > > >
> > > > > It's better to use device_set_node().
> > > >=20
> > > > I don't see how device_set_node() can help? It works on struct devi=
ce
> > > > pointers. Here priv->rcdev is a reset_controller_dev struct. There =
are
> > > > no users of device_set_node() in drivers/reset/.
> > >
> > > No users doesn't mean it's good. The API is relatively "new" and take=
s
> > > care of two things:
> > > 1) it uses agnostic interface;
> > > 2) it doesn't require any firmware node direct dereference.
> > >
> > > The 2) is most important here as allows us to refactor (firmware node=
) code
> > > in the future.
> >=20
> > I think I get the point of device_set_node(). I still do not understand
> > how it could help me fill the ->of_node field in a reset_controller_dev
> > structure?
>
> Exactly why I put the above comment as recommendation. And then I elabora=
ted
> that entire reset framework should rather move towards fwnode.

OK now I get it. One question: would using fwnode abstractions make
sense for a driver that is devicetree-only, and will stay that way?

However this sounds out-of-scope of such a driver addition. I also am
not familiar enough (yet?) with the reset subsystem and/or fwnode to be
able to bring this kind of changes upstream.

Thanks,

--
Th=C3=A9o Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com