All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>
Cc: arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kernel-team@meta.com, Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
	Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Convert OF-only paths to generic fwnode in SCMI core
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 10:39:29 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260824103929.00004912@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260813-acpi_scmi_pcc-v3-3-cb6b88b4ebb3@kernel.org>

On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 12:32:58 +0100
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:

> Switch SCMI core plumbing from struct device_node * to struct
> fwnode_handle * so the core can describe SCMI instances and protocols using
> firmware nodes rather than OF nodes directly.
> 
> This change:
>   - Replaces core OF property lookups with fwnode_property_*() helpers.
>   - Switches child enumeration to
>     fwnode_for_each_available_child_node_scoped().

Why the scoped version? See inline for more on this.  Probably just needs
a comment here (or use the non _scoped variant)

>   - Plumbs fwnode through the SCMI device creation and channel setup paths.
>   - Updates transport ->chan_available() callbacks to take a fwnode.
>   - Stores per-protocol child fwnodes in info->active_protocols so the core
>     can later locate the descriptor for a given protocol ID.
>   - Updates mailbox/optee/smc/virtio transports to accept fwnodes and map
>     back to OF nodes where their existing parsing remains DT-specific.
> 
> DT-only transports such as mailbox, OP-TEE and SMC still parse DT
> properties by mapping the fwnode back to an OF node. On non-DT systems
> these transports report no channel available.
> 
> This is a mechanical step towards firmware-node neutrality and prepares the
> SCMI core for non-DT transports, such as an ACPI/PCC transport. DT users
> continue to work unchanged; no non-DT transport is enabled by this patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>

A few minor things - with those cleaned up.  Only the cleanup.h one really
matters.

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com>

> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> index ef29fd223287..9014723e0f7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c

...

> @@ -3352,10 +3354,10 @@ static int scmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	scmi_enable_matching_quirks(info);
>  
> -	for_each_available_child_of_node(np, child) {
> +	fwnode_for_each_available_child_node_scoped(dev_fwnode(dev), child) {

There are no early exits yet and I can't see any added later in the series.
So the scoped bit is irrelevant.  I don't mind the change on basis of
hardening or similar but it needs a comment in the patch description to 
justify that.

>  		u32 prot_id;
>  
> -		if (of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &prot_id))
> +		if (fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &prot_id))
>  			continue;
>  
>  		if (!FIELD_FIT(MSG_PROTOCOL_ID_MASK, prot_id)) {
> @@ -3370,8 +3372,8 @@ static int scmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		}
>  
>  		/*
> -		 * Save this valid DT protocol descriptor amongst
> -		 * @active_protocols for this SCMI instance/
> +		 * Save this valid fwnode protocol descriptor amongst
> +		 * @active_protocols for this SCMI instance.
>  		 */
>  		ret = idr_alloc(&info->active_protocols, child,
>  				prot_id, prot_id + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -3381,7 +3383,7 @@ static int scmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  			continue;
>  		}
>  
> -		of_node_get(child);
> +		fwnode_handle_get(child);
>  		scmi_create_protocol_devices(child, info, prot_id, NULL);

Give this is handing over ownership I'd make that explicit and do

		scmi_create_protcol_devices(fwnode_handle_get(child), info,
					    prot_id, NULL);
but that is a slightly unrelated change - so I don't mind if you don't change
this one.

>  	}
>  
...



> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/smc.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/smc.c
> index 1fce3ccdeb7f..1079cd01190b 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/smc.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/smc.c
> @@ -84,10 +84,15 @@ static irqreturn_t smc_msg_done_isr(int irq, void *data)
>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  }
>  
> -static bool smc_chan_available(struct device_node *of_node, int idx)
> +static bool smc_chan_available(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, int idx)
>  {
> -	struct device_node *np __free(device_node) =
> -					of_parse_phandle(of_node, "shmem", 0);
> +	struct device_node *of_node = to_of_node(fwnode);
> +	struct device_node *np __free(device_node) = NULL;

See guidance in cleanup.h.  Basically says constructor and destructor
must be together (that was after some grumpy replies from Linus to early
cleanup.h users!)

> +
> +	if (!of_node)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	np = of_parse_phandle(of_node, "shmem", 0);
	struct device_node *np __free(device_node) =
		of_parse_phandle(of_node, "shmem", 0);

And don't worry about the inline declaration - this case is specifically
allowed.

>  	if (!np)
>  		return false;



  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-24 17:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-13 11:32 [PATCH v3 0/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Refactoring and enablement of ACPI PCC transport Sudeep Holla
2026-08-13 11:32 ` [PATCH v3 1/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Set fwnode for the generated SCMI platform device Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 16:51   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-02  7:51     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-09-02 23:26       ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-03  9:16         ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-08-13 11:32 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Extend transport driver macro to support ACPI Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 17:04   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-02  7:53     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-08-13 11:32 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Convert OF-only paths to generic fwnode in SCMI core Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 17:39   ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2026-09-02 13:39     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-09-02 23:29       ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-03  6:36         ` Sudeep Holla
2026-08-13 11:32 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Fall back to ACPI HID when "compatible" is absent Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 17:43   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-02  8:03     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-09-02  8:09       ` Sudeep Holla
2026-08-13 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Pass protocol ID to chan_available() transport callback Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 17:45   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-08-13 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Refactor protocol device creation logic Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 17:49   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-02 13:52     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-08-13 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Add ACPI PCC transport Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 20:17   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-03 13:43     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-08-13 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Initialise known ACPI protocol devices and channels Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 20:21   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-08-13 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Validate PCC shared memory signature Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 20:24   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-02  8:25     ` Sudeep Holla
2026-09-02 23:31       ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-09-03  6:39         ` Sudeep Holla

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260824103929.00004912@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --to=jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.