linux-gpio.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dipen Patel <dipenp@nvidia.com>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] gpiolib: reverse-assign the fwnode to struct gpio_chip
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2023 10:45:34 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZSEMnqAynnrfBxX1@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMRc=MdrLSPCEsQ6OEgRX-7Wh7ka+Rczja=QjY-srozj3cz68w@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 09:07:54PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 3:15 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 01:51:47PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > >
> > > struct gpio_chip is not only used to carry the information needed to
> > > set-up a GPIO device but is also used in all GPIOLIB callbacks and is
> > > passed to the matching functions of lookup helpers.
> > >
> > > In that last case, it is currently impossible to match a GPIO device by
> > > fwnode unless it was explicitly assigned to the chip in the provider
> > > code.
> >
> > That's expected behaviour.
> 
> Is it though? We now have a GPIO device that represents a piece of
> physical hardware that has an fwnode assigned and the associated GPIO
> chip (tied to that device) that has none. How is that logical? It's
> not coherent.

To me it is pretty much logical, yes. The providers decide themselves
if they want to have any specific device node for the chip or inherit
it from the physical hardware. Note, there are two types of the FW descriptions
of the GPIO controller, when it's 1:1 to the banks and when it's one device
with list of children, one per bank. Due to this differences we have
this field in the GPIO chip to begin with.


> I'm not surprised users of that code will be confused -
> like Dipen in this case.

Which case? I'm still unsure you pictured the issue here.
Where can I read about it?

> > > If the fwnode is taken from the parent device, the pointer in
> > > struct gpio_chip will remain NULL.
> >
> > > If we have a parent device but gc->fwnode was not assigned by the
> > > provider, let's assign it ourselves so that lookup by fwnode can work in
> > > all cases.
> >
> > I don't think this is a good change. We paper over the real issue where
> > we and callers need to understand what they are looking for.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > This is something that Dipen reported with one of the tegra drivers where
> > > a GPIO lookup by fwnode does not work because the fwnode pointer in struct
> > > gpio_chip is NULL. This patch addresses this use-case.
> >
> > I am not sure I understand the problem here. All these should have been
> > addressed already, no?
> >
> > So, the GPIOLIB should use dev_fwnode(&gdev->dev) inside it, outside it
> > the GPIO drivers are free to use gc->fwnode as long as they understand
> > the lifetime of the respective object.
> >
> >
> > --
> > With Best Regards,
> > Andy Shevchenko
> >
> >

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko



  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-07  7:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-06 11:51 [RFC/RFT PATCH] gpiolib: reverse-assign the fwnode to struct gpio_chip Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-10-06 13:14 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-10-06 19:07   ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-10-07  7:45     ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2023-10-07 15:53       ` Linus Walleij
2023-10-09 18:28       ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-10-06 13:24 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-10-06 19:07   ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-10-06 22:22     ` Linus Walleij
2023-10-07  7:39       ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-10-07  7:36     ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-10-06 22:14 ` Linus Walleij
2023-10-07  7:03   ` Andy Shevchenko

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=ZSEMnqAynnrfBxX1@smile.fi.intel.com \
    --to=andy@kernel.org \
    --cc=bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org \
    --cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
    --cc=dipenp@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).