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 1/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Set fwnode for the generated SCMI platform device
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 09:51:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260824095121.00001b9c@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260813-acpi_scmi_pcc-v3-1-cb6b88b4ebb3@kernel.org>
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 12:32:56 +0100
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:
> Add a call to device_set_node() in the SCMI probe helper to associate
> generated SCMI platform device with the firmware node of its supplier
> transport device.
>
> This complements device_set_of_node_from_dev() and ensures that
> firmware node information is propagated correctly for both Device Tree
> and non-DT (e.g. ACPI) based systems.
Hi Sudeep,
When you say 'complement' I'd like to see a little more. The guts
of both calls includes setting dev->ofnode() adn the extra bit
in device_set_of_node_from_dev() is about ensuring we drop existing
node reference (there isn't one) and increment the reference for what
is the parent of_node.
I may be wrong, but I think that is unnecessary and if I'm wrong I'd
like to see more info here on why it is needed.
Also, if this is commonly needed why doesn't device_set_node() include
that dance?
Unless I fumbled the command, a grep suggests there are no instances
in tree of these both being called near each other.
Jonathan
>
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> index fe8c22cfb9f7..cc7d11c3c1f3 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> @@ -650,6 +650,7 @@ static int __tag##_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) \
> } \
> \
> device_set_of_node_from_dev(&spdev->dev, dev); \
> + device_set_node(&spdev->dev, dev_fwnode(dev)); \
> \
> strans.supplier = supplier; \
> memcpy(&strans.desc, &(__desc), sizeof(strans.desc)); \
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-24 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ 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 [this message]
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
2026-08-13 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
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
2026-08-13 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
2026-08-13 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Add ACPI PCC transport Sudeep Holla
2026-08-24 20:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-08-13 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
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=20260824095121.00001b9c@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