From: robherring2@gmail.com (Rob Herring)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] OF: base: match each node compatible against all given matches first
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 08:00:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <529C927A.9000303@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131202120300.GA12793@ulmo.nvidia.com>
On 12/02/2013 06:03 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 07:36:25PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth
> wrote:
>> Currently, of_match_node compares each given match against all
>> node's compatible strings with of_device_is_compatible.
>>
>> To achieve multiple compatible strings per node with ordering
>> from specific to generic, this requires given matches to be
>> ordered from specific to generic. For most of the drivers this
>> is not true and also an alphabetical ordering is more sane
>> there.
>>
>> Therefore, this patch modifies of_match_node to match each of
>> the node's compatible strings against all given matches first,
>> before checking the next compatible string. This implies that
>> node's compatibles are ordered from specific to generic while
>> given matches can be in any order.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
>> <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> --- Cc: Grant Likely
>> <grant.likely@linaro.org> Cc: Rob Herring
>> <rob.herring@calxeda.com> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
>> <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Russell King
>> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org Cc:
>> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org Cc:
>> linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org --- drivers/of/base.c | 47
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed,
>> 32 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> I think you're one in a long line of people attempting to fix
> this. I tried myself over a year ago (commit 107a84e61cdd 'of:
> match by compatible property first') but it caused a subtle
> regression late in the release cycle and was reverted (commit
> bc51b0c22ceb 'Revert "of: match by compatible property first").
>
> Only recently there was another attempt [0] but it's pretty much
> equivalent to what I did back then.
>
> That said, I think you might actually have nailed it with this
> patch. From what I remember all earlier attempt failed because
> they didn't match all compatible/name/type combinations properly.
> I'm adding a few people on Cc who were involved with the other
> patches, perhaps they can give your patch a spin and see if it
> fixes things for them.
I agree and the change here is simple enough I think the chances of a
regression are low. But there is one issue...
>
> Thierry
>
> [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/3/585
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index
>> 7d4c70f..183a9c7 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++
>> b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -713,23 +713,37 @@ static const struct
>> of_device_id *__of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches,
>> const struct device_node *node) { + const char *cp; + int cplen,
>> l; + if (!matches) return NULL;
>>
>> - while (matches->name[0] || matches->type[0] ||
>> matches->compatible[0]) { - int match = 1; - if
>> (matches->name[0]) - match &= node->name - &&
>> !strcmp(matches->name, node->name); - if (matches->type[0]) -
>> match &= node->type - && !strcmp(matches->type, node->type);
>> - if (matches->compatible[0]) - match &=
>> __of_device_is_compatible(node, - matches->compatible);
>> - if (match) - return matches; - matches++; + cp =
>> __of_get_property(node, "compatible", &cplen); + if (!cp) +
>> return NULL;
No compatible property and matching on name and/or type only is valid.
Remove the if here and changing the following should work:
>> + + while (cplen > 0) {
do {
>> + const struct of_device_id *m = matches; + + while
>> (m->name[0] || m->type[0] || m->compatible[0]) { + int match =
>> 1; + if (m->name[0]) + match &= node->name + &&
>> !strcmp(m->name, node->name); + if (m->type[0]) + match &=
>> node->type + && !strcmp(m->type, node->type); + if
>> (m->compatible[0])
if (cp && m->compatible[0])
>> + match &= !of_compat_cmp(cp, m->compatible, +
>> strlen(m->compatible)); + if (match) + return m; + m++; +
>> } + l = strlen(cp) + 1; + cp += l; + cplen -= l; }
} while (cp && (cplen > 0));
>> return NULL; } @@ -739,7 +753,10 @@ const struct of_device_id
>> *__of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches, * @matches:
>> array of of device match structures to search in * @node: the
>> of device structure to match against * - * Low level utility
>> function used by device matching. + * Low level utility function
>> used by device matching. Matching order + * is to compare each
>> of the node's compatibles with all given matches + * first. This
>> implies node's compatible is sorted from specific to + * generic
>> while matches can be in any order. */ const struct of_device_id
>> *of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches, const struct
>> device_node *node) -- 1.7.10.4
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel
>> mailing list linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robherring2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Thierry Reding
<thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth
<sebastian.hesselbarth-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Russell King <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<benh-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Grant Likely
<grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
Meelis Roos <mroos-Y27EyoLml9s@public.gmane.org>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>,
Scott Wood <scottwood-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OF: base: match each node compatible against all given matches first
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 08:00:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <529C927A.9000303@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131202120300.GA12793-AwZRO8vwLAwmlAP/+Wk3EA@public.gmane.org>
On 12/02/2013 06:03 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 07:36:25PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth
> wrote:
>> Currently, of_match_node compares each given match against all
>> node's compatible strings with of_device_is_compatible.
>>
>> To achieve multiple compatible strings per node with ordering
>> from specific to generic, this requires given matches to be
>> ordered from specific to generic. For most of the drivers this
>> is not true and also an alphabetical ordering is more sane
>> there.
>>
>> Therefore, this patch modifies of_match_node to match each of
>> the node's compatible strings against all given matches first,
>> before checking the next compatible string. This implies that
>> node's compatibles are ordered from specific to generic while
>> given matches can be in any order.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
>> <sebastian.hesselbarth-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> --- Cc: Grant Likely
>> <grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> Cc: Rob Herring
>> <rob.herring-bsGFqQB8/DxBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
>> <benh-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org> Cc: Russell King
>> <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org> Cc: devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Cc:
>> linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org Cc:
>> linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org --- drivers/of/base.c | 47
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed,
>> 32 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> I think you're one in a long line of people attempting to fix
> this. I tried myself over a year ago (commit 107a84e61cdd 'of:
> match by compatible property first') but it caused a subtle
> regression late in the release cycle and was reverted (commit
> bc51b0c22ceb 'Revert "of: match by compatible property first").
>
> Only recently there was another attempt [0] but it's pretty much
> equivalent to what I did back then.
>
> That said, I think you might actually have nailed it with this
> patch. From what I remember all earlier attempt failed because
> they didn't match all compatible/name/type combinations properly.
> I'm adding a few people on Cc who were involved with the other
> patches, perhaps they can give your patch a spin and see if it
> fixes things for them.
I agree and the change here is simple enough I think the chances of a
regression are low. But there is one issue...
>
> Thierry
>
> [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/3/585
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index
>> 7d4c70f..183a9c7 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++
>> b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -713,23 +713,37 @@ static const struct
>> of_device_id *__of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches,
>> const struct device_node *node) { + const char *cp; + int cplen,
>> l; + if (!matches) return NULL;
>>
>> - while (matches->name[0] || matches->type[0] ||
>> matches->compatible[0]) { - int match = 1; - if
>> (matches->name[0]) - match &= node->name - &&
>> !strcmp(matches->name, node->name); - if (matches->type[0]) -
>> match &= node->type - && !strcmp(matches->type, node->type);
>> - if (matches->compatible[0]) - match &=
>> __of_device_is_compatible(node, - matches->compatible);
>> - if (match) - return matches; - matches++; + cp =
>> __of_get_property(node, "compatible", &cplen); + if (!cp) +
>> return NULL;
No compatible property and matching on name and/or type only is valid.
Remove the if here and changing the following should work:
>> + + while (cplen > 0) {
do {
>> + const struct of_device_id *m = matches; + + while
>> (m->name[0] || m->type[0] || m->compatible[0]) { + int match =
>> 1; + if (m->name[0]) + match &= node->name + &&
>> !strcmp(m->name, node->name); + if (m->type[0]) + match &=
>> node->type + && !strcmp(m->type, node->type); + if
>> (m->compatible[0])
if (cp && m->compatible[0])
>> + match &= !of_compat_cmp(cp, m->compatible, +
>> strlen(m->compatible)); + if (match) + return m; + m++; +
>> } + l = strlen(cp) + 1; + cp += l; + cplen -= l; }
} while (cp && (cplen > 0));
>> return NULL; } @@ -739,7 +753,10 @@ const struct of_device_id
>> *__of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches, * @matches:
>> array of of device match structures to search in * @node: the
>> of device structure to match against * - * Low level utility
>> function used by device matching. + * Low level utility function
>> used by device matching. Matching order + * is to compare each
>> of the node's compatibles with all given matches + * first. This
>> implies node's compatible is sorted from specific to + * generic
>> while matches can be in any order. */ const struct of_device_id
>> *of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches, const struct
>> device_node *node) -- 1.7.10.4
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel
>> mailing list linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Meelis Roos <mroos@linux.ee>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OF: base: match each node compatible against all given matches first
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 08:00:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <529C927A.9000303@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131202120300.GA12793@ulmo.nvidia.com>
On 12/02/2013 06:03 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 07:36:25PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth
> wrote:
>> Currently, of_match_node compares each given match against all
>> node's compatible strings with of_device_is_compatible.
>>
>> To achieve multiple compatible strings per node with ordering
>> from specific to generic, this requires given matches to be
>> ordered from specific to generic. For most of the drivers this
>> is not true and also an alphabetical ordering is more sane
>> there.
>>
>> Therefore, this patch modifies of_match_node to match each of
>> the node's compatible strings against all given matches first,
>> before checking the next compatible string. This implies that
>> node's compatibles are ordered from specific to generic while
>> given matches can be in any order.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
>> <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> --- Cc: Grant Likely
>> <grant.likely@linaro.org> Cc: Rob Herring
>> <rob.herring@calxeda.com> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
>> <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Russell King
>> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Cc:
>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc:
>> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- drivers/of/base.c | 47
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed,
>> 32 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> I think you're one in a long line of people attempting to fix
> this. I tried myself over a year ago (commit 107a84e61cdd 'of:
> match by compatible property first') but it caused a subtle
> regression late in the release cycle and was reverted (commit
> bc51b0c22ceb 'Revert "of: match by compatible property first").
>
> Only recently there was another attempt [0] but it's pretty much
> equivalent to what I did back then.
>
> That said, I think you might actually have nailed it with this
> patch. From what I remember all earlier attempt failed because
> they didn't match all compatible/name/type combinations properly.
> I'm adding a few people on Cc who were involved with the other
> patches, perhaps they can give your patch a spin and see if it
> fixes things for them.
I agree and the change here is simple enough I think the chances of a
regression are low. But there is one issue...
>
> Thierry
>
> [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/3/585
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index
>> 7d4c70f..183a9c7 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++
>> b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -713,23 +713,37 @@ static const struct
>> of_device_id *__of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches,
>> const struct device_node *node) { + const char *cp; + int cplen,
>> l; + if (!matches) return NULL;
>>
>> - while (matches->name[0] || matches->type[0] ||
>> matches->compatible[0]) { - int match = 1; - if
>> (matches->name[0]) - match &= node->name - &&
>> !strcmp(matches->name, node->name); - if (matches->type[0]) -
>> match &= node->type - && !strcmp(matches->type, node->type);
>> - if (matches->compatible[0]) - match &=
>> __of_device_is_compatible(node, - matches->compatible);
>> - if (match) - return matches; - matches++; + cp =
>> __of_get_property(node, "compatible", &cplen); + if (!cp) +
>> return NULL;
No compatible property and matching on name and/or type only is valid.
Remove the if here and changing the following should work:
>> + + while (cplen > 0) {
do {
>> + const struct of_device_id *m = matches; + + while
>> (m->name[0] || m->type[0] || m->compatible[0]) { + int match =
>> 1; + if (m->name[0]) + match &= node->name + &&
>> !strcmp(m->name, node->name); + if (m->type[0]) + match &=
>> node->type + && !strcmp(m->type, node->type); + if
>> (m->compatible[0])
if (cp && m->compatible[0])
>> + match &= !of_compat_cmp(cp, m->compatible, +
>> strlen(m->compatible)); + if (match) + return m; + m++; +
>> } + l = strlen(cp) + 1; + cp += l; + cplen -= l; }
} while (cp && (cplen > 0));
>> return NULL; } @@ -739,7 +753,10 @@ const struct of_device_id
>> *__of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches, * @matches:
>> array of of device match structures to search in * @node: the
>> of device structure to match against * - * Low level utility
>> function used by device matching. + * Low level utility function
>> used by device matching. Matching order + * is to compare each
>> of the node's compatibles with all given matches + * first. This
>> implies node's compatible is sorted from specific to + * generic
>> while matches can be in any order. */ const struct of_device_id
>> *of_match_node(const struct of_device_id *matches, const struct
>> device_node *node) -- 1.7.10.4
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel
>> mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-02 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-28 18:36 [PATCH] OF: base: match each node compatible against all given matches first Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-11-28 18:36 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-11-28 18:36 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-02 12:03 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-02 12:03 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-02 12:03 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-02 14:00 ` Rob Herring [this message]
2013-12-02 14:00 ` Rob Herring
2013-12-02 14:00 ` Rob Herring
2013-12-02 14:09 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-02 14:09 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-02 14:09 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-03 13:52 ` [PATCH v2] " Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-03 13:52 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-03 13:52 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-03 20:14 ` Meelis Roos
2013-12-03 20:14 ` Meelis Roos
2013-12-03 20:14 ` Meelis Roos
2013-12-03 22:55 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-03 22:55 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-03 22:55 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-12-04 9:40 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-04 9:40 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-04 9:40 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-04 13:08 ` Meelis Roos
2013-12-04 13:08 ` Meelis Roos
2013-12-04 13:08 ` Meelis Roos
2013-12-04 14:04 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-04 14:04 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-04 14:04 ` Thierry Reding
2013-12-04 19:23 ` Rob Herring
2013-12-04 19:23 ` Rob Herring
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=529C927A.9000303@gmail.com \
--to=robherring2@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.