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;
next prev parent 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox