Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-142881-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 17:28:29 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
	Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	kernel-team@android.com, Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] of: dynamic: Fix overlayed devices not probing
 because of fw_devlink
Message-ID: <ZhlFDeDxict3ThJO@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240411235623.1260061-1-saravanak@google.com>
 <20240411235623.1260061-3-saravanak@google.com>
 <CAL_JsqKRVVNzgQk6PETfJ9RrDuzT1CTjHWW02Twc_T4C82t__Q@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqKRVVNzgQk6PETfJ9RrDuzT1CTjHWW02Twc_T4C82t__Q@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 07:54:32AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 6:56 PM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com> wrote:

> I think it is better to not have this wrapper. We want it to be clear
> when we're acquiring a ref. I know get_device() does that, but I have
> to look up what get_dev_from_fwnode() does exactly.
> 
> Side note: I didn't know fwnode has a ptr to the struct device. I
> wonder if we can kill off of_find_device_by_node() using that. That's
> for platform devices though.

I don't like the idea because we already have a big design issue with fwnode
that is used in struct device. Ideally, fwnode has to be a node in the linked
list, head of which is provided by the user (struct device, for example).
When it's done, it will be easy to handle.

Have you read the comment in the struct fwnode_handle definition?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko