All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Yunus Bas <Y.Bas@phytec.de>
Cc: "stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com" <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: mfd-core: Change "Failed to locate of_node" warning to debug
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 09:42:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YNwuXWGe8am89Bn9@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5a718e7812f2ce46347ae94fda6175f38c65359e.camel@phytec.de>

> No. This is not about DA9061 or it's mfd_cell-entries at all. My
> concern is about the general behaviour of the MFD-framework and how
> mfd_cell entries with compatibles are initialized.

I'm still not 100% sure I understand your use-case.

Let's take this back to basics.

What device are you trying to instantiate?  A DA9062 derivative?

> > Actually, this has served to highlight that your DTS is not correct.
> > 
> > Why are some devices represented in DT and some aren't?
> > 
> > If anything, I'm tempted to upgrade the info() print to warn().
> > 
> 
> Imagine only required parts of the MFD is connected to the designed
> system and unrequired parts are not. In that case, fully describing the
> MFD in the devicetree wouldn't represent the system at all.
> 
> Actually it would make more sense to check if mfd_cell-entries with
> compatibles are represented in the devicetree and add them after
> matching. This way the warning would serve it's purpose. What do you
> think of it?

I think the DT and MFD should match, so again, the way I currently
view this, doing it this way is just a different way to paper over the
cracks.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-30  8:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-16  8:19 [PATCH] mfd: mfd-core: Change "Failed to locate of_node" warning to debug Yunus Bas
2021-06-16  9:03 ` Lee Jones
2021-06-17  7:46   ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-17  8:27     ` Lee Jones
2021-06-29  7:25       ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-29  9:07         ` Lee Jones
2021-06-29  9:41           ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-29 13:39         ` Lee Jones
2021-06-30  7:27           ` Yunus Bas
2021-06-30  8:42             ` Lee Jones [this message]
2021-06-30 10:55             ` Daniel Thompson
2021-06-30 12:33               ` Lee Jones
2021-07-01 15:34                 ` Yunus Bas
2021-07-01 16:45                   ` Lee Jones
2021-07-02 12:59                   ` Daniel Thompson
2021-07-02 18:36                     ` Lee Jones
2021-07-02 19:10                       ` Daniel Thompson
2021-07-05  7:24                         ` Yunus Bas
2021-07-05  7:31                           ` Lee Jones
2021-07-05  7:50                             ` Yunus Bas
2021-07-05  8:05                               ` Lee Jones

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=YNwuXWGe8am89Bn9@dell \
    --to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=Y.Bas@phytec.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com \
    /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.