From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout-04.galae.net (smtpout-04.galae.net [185.171.202.116]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18D402FC00B for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 15:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.171.202.116 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765466366; cv=none; b=aFu2zDKlLEhV4I4GuNKilJ5UtlgVc+YFFC5QPBK12z1DIRHDFnqcCllQjwth+Fg0o8EraVVL9Pv5lf6YngUOA8QG6XsI4Ec7SrGka877VEobe4V6XVSGiuG9BRIaJKKllt+e7U61OOmQq79rgJBkbgCoTp8Tqf54K6x7/gNKEhE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765466366; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fWpmLL1z7q9BxSPVUYz8JHtTujuBUEm3CzFbbQaDgtc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=PjGR9AdkR5Zm0Py/M6B+dh3Uanst0wXn8Pa4N9IXiczW3kU1tOdc17aXsfM8XoInM3AZB44KP4UYxOCS2GK7tgJLHeChf07hi7BTbhVaVKyc9PzrtXB3xJZZQKENPUPVoUHI5h32ffC2ZbOL9pXy1z5lG8y3absxC/Dlz6J/e9o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=GZ04GN+Y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.171.202.116 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="GZ04GN+Y" Received: from smtpout-01.galae.net (smtpout-01.galae.net [212.83.139.233]) by smtpout-04.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00CF0C1934C; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 15:18:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.galae.net (mail.galae.net [212.83.136.155]) by smtpout-01.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5BA16068C; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 15:19:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 641CD103C8C7B; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 16:19:03 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=dkim; t=1765466359; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=7YFG4wLJmjR/E/MqOc1NCEw1lot9ZBUWy77cdvC/abM=; b=GZ04GN+YsE0cv0BQQYoZpyVYAYEsovdzJ9rXmDON0bJIZxnJU7VPl2eg1p8e0NQ9k+K5Dp /LRca+qQVGSjdqk8rZVoLiG+Y+sqtI/yxaymDKJc9jZxsUrEC0ffilz5i/Pg3I8zRmwpJS taMVcM89WUFFX51Ek3tAsGArlvFRqyRVPdmd6IrgjHKE7xrG4LzqbztURSYcKnyHSuVeO0 J67fZCzMN/AGR3a33M4QUHtoTEJbjcuY3+UKEhaz2RTDuiDFFZpLeGkOJMjJFnFSz1vbjo hs+44nERIBIh7DW/ujTn09iVGaGgu0W9sZBJpf2sMe5nwN92PyYkCL/V4aE1wA== Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 16:19:02 +0100 From: Herve Codina To: Matti Vaittinen , Geert Uytterhoeven , Rob Herring , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Ulf Hansson Cc: Kalle Niemi , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Lunn , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Danilo Krummrich , Shawn Guo , Sascha Hauer , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Fabio Estevam , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Andi Shyti , Wolfram Sang , Peter Rosin , Arnd Bergmann , Bjorn Helgaas , Charles Keepax , Richard Fitzgerald , David Rhodes , Linus Walleij , Mark Brown , Andy Shevchenko , Daniel Scally , Heikki Krogerus , Sakari Ailus , Len Brown , Davidlohr Bueso , Jonathan Cameron , Dave Jiang , Alison Schofield , Vishal Verma , Ira Weiny , Dan Williams , Wolfram Sang , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-sound@vger.kernel.org, patches@opensource.cirrus.com, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, Allan Nielsen , Horatiu Vultur , Steen Hegelund , Luca Ceresoli , Thomas Petazzoni Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/29] Revert "treewide: Fix probing of devices in DT overlays" Message-ID: <20251211161902.11ef4248@bootlin.com> In-Reply-To: <1b9fa77b-d74a-4fa7-b2e7-8b389d59a5a0@gmail.com> References: <20251015071420.1173068-1-herve.codina@bootlin.com> <5cf2a12a-7c66-4622-b4a9-14896c6df005@gmail.com> <072dde7c-a53c-4525-83ac-57ea38edc0b5@gmail.com> <55076f4b-d523-4f8c-8bd4-0645b790737e@gmail.com> <20251202102619.5cd971cc@bootlin.com> <088af3ff-bd04-4bc9-b304-85f6ed555f2a@gmail.com> <20251202175836.747593c0@bootlin.com> <20251204083839.4fb8a4b1@bootlin.com> <20251210132140.32dbc3d7@bootlin.com> <20251211132044.10f5b1ea@bootlin.com> <1b9fa77b-d74a-4fa7-b2e7-8b389d59a5a0@gmail.com> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.43; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 Hi Matti, Geert, all, On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 15:52:28 +0200 Matti Vaittinen wrote: > On 11/12/2025 14:20, Herve Codina wrote: > > Hi Matti, > > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 10:34:46 +0200 > > Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > /snip > > > > > Do you see the same trace with: > > - "pinctrl-0 = <&i2c1_pins>;" in your overlay > > - fragment0 removed from the overlay (i2c1_pins definition removed from > > the overlay. > > - i2c1_pins node defined in your base DT. > > Just tested. The i2c1 appears and the test-overlay probe gets called, > when the i2c1_pins is in the base-dt and not in the overlay. Geert, do you expirement same results? > > > In other word, is the issues related to adding a pinctrl sub-node (pinctrl > > pins definition) in the overlay or is it something else? > > Seems to be related to the pinctrl. > I don't think that the issue is related to pinctrl itself. IMHO, I think the issue is related to overlays and fw_devlink. The distinction between "a new node is going to lead to a device" vs "a new node is just data and will never been attached to a new device" when an overlay is applied is broken. This is broken with the upstream "treewide: Fix probing of devices in DT overlays" commit I've tried to revert. Indeed, on the LAN966x PCI device use case devlinks created are not correct with this commit applied. I am not sure also that devlinks created with a more complex overlay will be correct. For instance, Matti, with your overlay not sure that a phandle from the oscillator node referencing the pmic node will lead to a correct provider/consumer devlink between the pmic device and the oscillator device. On the other hand, this is broken with "of: dynamic: Fix overlayed devices not probing because of fw_devlink" works for the LAN966x PCI device use case an lead to correct devlinks but breaks your use cases. Does anyone have an idea about how to fix those issues? Best regards, Hervé