From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (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 7E00732FA19 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2026 10:29:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769423372; cv=none; b=M3+zYRXBFXaQgyp3npa7gR5ymbCRSHU64BcnUydqFKXlUU+3LKqzy/nAXCbM11EW3BYXqETZot3eKwXT++D/S89VwoOi7eEusoU3Bl1TSy9lJKBIpyBq7//eMa39aNcAB3wY80fI2nArLgvymMC9PXoA/nicS6Z3zxOmSIl70Rc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769423372; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Jh9DbPdyhqX1cvGDcyHJMZub+1uUsIMf6B/WAv++Rbo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=KMcJIG9Q4dAg5mX0uQkJI975GkBsHqCSXxIN7gt2Om+ceUwLsmsj6XS8eIZp1iFM+1gGYH8bOh0Tgd9rQCA0B3kN3hw5VeMtKiULDzc+G7Lc7TrUwMjscxBCnqEA1AtwsXa1OwBBlllP0MhBbj/maxiTbBAmxthCyq8B3yOcHpk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=jHX8+Wl7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="jHX8+Wl7" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=F2bF S/uMFLgtEVC0YCnMXZC86wb3SDlDFVJk5gHDbHs=; b=jHX8+Wl7CjOEdsajEoyd YLJSni1KMKFnTnF6HUkKy4i7hdARKm53juZzr7ZafJR47rtHoNyWJaaKdHJ/2sso LqYQH5W3d0RaRaQ8Q8J1G9u4nNTashMNVexC1gLUhUwVMKjdwdx0vBnOcNj2BbqO OzdLxlpS3qYwey2EMbughKgdVpyf2lbwjuTyiOgPikJmtfRlj0LYKeoBgjXrSvoV mlK/IzdLZzcuzrQK6IypnN/vpPwAKgfyOgmhmg2cICJBgE71R+rc1lx8MlV6l5v8 F39Y7wqyE8Wvnw4+qlOC0DvLTWsXo+ZALNH34HFE5YzYV8NWVP6e4yVnRLb2de1H 6g== Received: (qmail 2710669 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2026 11:29:27 +0100 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with UTF8SMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 26 Jan 2026 11:29:27 +0100 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@tFg7+0dJFMUujnvz Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 11:29:26 +0100 From: Wolfram Sang To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Torgue , Andy Shevchenko , Antonio Borneo , Arnd Bergmann , Baolin Wang , Bjorn Andersson , Boqun Feng , Chen-Yu Tsai , Chunyan Zhang , Danilo Krummrich , David Lechner , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , Jernej Skrabec , Jonathan Cameron , Jonathan Corbet , Konrad Dybcio , Lee Jones , Linus Walleij , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, Mark Brown , Maxime Coquelin , Nuno =?utf-8?B?U8Oh?= , Orson Zhai , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Samuel Holland , Shuah Khan , Srinivas Kandagatla , Thomas Gleixner , Waiman Long , Wilken Gottwalt , Will Deacon Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] hwspinlock: refactor headers into public provider/consumer pair Message-ID: References: <20260125184654.17843-6-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: > > Providers need it, especially the 'priv' member. Consumers won't see it. > > But can't we make it opaque? > > We may have getters and setters for the priv member... I think we could do that. Two drivers use the bank member, but only for the device (lock->bank->dev). That can probably be refactored away, I'd guess.