Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-185891-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 10:00:26 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@quicinc.com>,
	Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@quicinc.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/13] mfd: pm8008: rework driver
Message-ID: <Zk2mGpseH3DFqCjK@hovoldconsulting.com>
References: <20240506150830.23709-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org>
 <20240506150830.23709-12-johan+linaro@kernel.org>
 <ZjktIrsZS-T7cm-A@surfacebook.localdomain>
 <ZjyafGz_1pY4J9C7@hovoldconsulting.com>
 <CAHp75VfP2AB45mn6gB3suCAO9iT3bOWZ=7m9U7E087Lac0P3gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zk2VX5JRzmePxG4N@hovoldconsulting.com>
 <CAHp75Vcs3DvBK3P058gU6L-24Q9PTrPg_hLujxaUGHNB=JCW0A@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: <CAHp75Vcs3DvBK3P058gU6L-24Q9PTrPg_hLujxaUGHNB=JCW0A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 10:13:33AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 9:49 AM Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:15:43PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:42 PM Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 10:18:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > Mon, May 06, 2024 at 05:08:28PM +0200, Johan Hovold kirjoitti:

> > > > > > +static void devm_irq_domain_fwnode_release(void *res)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > >
> > > > > > +   struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = res;
> > > > >
> > > > > Unneeded line, can be
> > > > >
> > > > > static void devm_irq_domain_fwnode_release(void *fwnode)
> > > > >
> > > > > > +   irq_domain_free_fwnode(fwnode);
> > > > > > +}
> > > >
> > > > I think I prefer it this way for clarity and for type safety in the
> > > > unlikely even that the argument to irq_domain_free_fwnode() would ever
> > > > change.
> > >
> > > If it ever changes, the allocation part most likely would need an
> > > update and since devm_add_action() takes this type of function, I
> > > don't believe the argument would ever change from void * to something
> > > else. With this it just adds an additional burden on the conversion.
> >
> > I was referring to the irq_domain_free_fwnode() prototype.
> 
> And I also referred to that one. The release callback, i.e. the type
> of the parameter, is solely defined by a caller of devm_add_action()
> end friends, and in this case it means that if ever the type changes
> (this is your argument why you want to have explicit line for that,
> necessity of which I oppose) the devm_add_action() arguments also has
> to be changed, it can't be done _just_ there, in
> irq_domain_free_fwnode().

No, not necessarily, but as I already wrote above this is unlikely to
ever be of practical concern.

Johan