From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V4 08/12] boot_constraint: Manage deferrable constraints
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 20:09:12 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171213143912.GN3322@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171213103315.GI10595@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
On 13-12-17, 10:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 03:57:07PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 13-12-17, 10:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 07:18:56PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > +static void add_deferrable_of_single(struct device_node *np,
> > > > + struct dev_boot_constraint *constraints,
> > > > + int count)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct device *dev;
> > > > + int ret;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!of_device_is_available(np))
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > + ret = of_platform_bus_create(np, NULL, NULL, NULL, false);
> > > > + if (ret)
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "arm,primecell")) {
> > >
> > > Why is "arm,primecell" in the core code here?
> >
> > All we need here is a struct device pointer to add constraints. But how we get
> > the device node depends on what bus type the device corresponds to. Currently
> > this only support amba and platform devices, but we may need to get spi, i2c,
> > etc later on.
> >
> > How do you suggest to keep this stuff out of core here ? Are you asking me to
> > add a generic API in the OF core to find the struct device pointer using a node
> > pointer ?
>
> Why do we need this? Why can't we lookup the "struct device" by DT
> node, and then look at the device's bus type and decide what to do
> from that?
My requirement is only to get the struct device * for the DT node and I don't
really need to get into the bus specific details at all. I was not sure if there
is a way to lookup for the "struct device" by its DT node currently and so
depended on helpers like of_find_device_by_node(). Can you please point me to
the routine (or the way we can traverse all devices) ?
> Wouldn't a better solution be to use fwnode stuff for this, and
> make the bus-type handling a property of the bus type itself,
> pushing the bus specific code into the bus layer?
As I said earlier, I don't really need to work at the bus level. I just need the
device structure and so that may not be required.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-13 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-29 13:48 [PATCH V4 00/12] drivers: Boot Constraints core Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 01/12] of: platform: Add of_find_amba_device_by_node() Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 02/12] of: platform: Make of_platform_bus_create() global Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 03/12] drivers: Add boot constraints core Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:42 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-12-13 9:59 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:42 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-12-13 10:00 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 04/12] boot_constraint: Add support for supply constraints Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:48 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 05/12] boot_constraint: Add support for clk constraints Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:48 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 06/12] boot_constraint: Add support for PM constraints Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:48 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 07/12] boot_constraint: Add debugfs support Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 15:09 ` Randy Dunlap
2017-10-30 3:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-30 3:43 ` Randy Dunlap
2017-12-13 9:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 08/12] boot_constraint: Manage deferrable constraints Viresh Kumar
2017-10-31 16:20 ` Rob Herring
2017-11-01 2:29 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:53 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-12-13 10:27 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 10:33 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-12-13 14:39 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 09/12] boot_constraint: Add earlycon helper Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:44 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-12-14 5:22 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 10/12] boot_constraint: Add support for Hisilicon platforms Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:47 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-12-13 10:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-29 13:48 ` [PATCH V4 11/12] boot_constraint: Add support for IMX platform Viresh Kumar
2017-11-03 8:58 ` Sascha Hauer
2017-10-29 13:49 ` [PATCH V4 12/12] boot_constraint: Add Qualcomm display controller constraints Viresh Kumar
2017-10-30 22:07 ` [PATCH V4 00/12] drivers: Boot Constraints core Rob Herring
2017-10-31 10:01 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-11-28 4:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-12-13 9:55 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-12-13 10:27 ` Viresh Kumar
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=20171213143912.GN3322@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox