From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) (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 AD29A329E49; Mon, 26 Jan 2026 10:00:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769421603; cv=none; b=f5TTxjw1zFP4xgyUhEkICwuk8Vivt/LOkHaVxUmEFWq+8jnqFXoCQw9+AQ9YL22ppn2cYoH6xQ9vJ/7V5m9J7NQaQyxKSCmd7dtAur6ynGtIhYjQx7vxc+EbIpPE1zjzo6w73jc6tdTba2y1qi7B0V1NCaRhk3mCPHPzG4hm/vk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769421603; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8+66ynW/UosBvC/E+PZZmULkSUQHS1YNGDIGs4shhqw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Kdf9+TAoWpIk49DpS7cfNTCLBKzzquI+QiPS+2PTAYY+MZ7nmjMtN8tMpeQoLWjGF+eOaDV6GQhXMyfqmhKjrLSvjQjSLHrxzmnl7biwqmBbWPxfva7seZUc+3ZXSxJUA3hTL38d4NNvZ43ykogIiM6uoq2MfDfI2x0P7AAoWcU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=NmTer1ie; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="NmTer1ie" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1769421601; x=1800957601; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=8+66ynW/UosBvC/E+PZZmULkSUQHS1YNGDIGs4shhqw=; b=NmTer1ieWlIOpTqEXaCTGgZnw9ZQIPsQJuCT/9TAvZLDhOVPiWmb4mP5 5qhmuU+nkBIbTt0wFvZXw/NDEPUJxxd2W5EUI1F3Fb3VQ5pOzri1Nf1H4 LE2u9+fCmG329hDGdp//fXII7iWOtpxY3Fet7vE+0nOVt26zABq//VZzq zHT6O5NSpPB/E+QKfrlZBmk4VHstnxpXK8aujzLbLJlKwMKKnqdH/24Ni m42psYQKb7w4zZA4AeaW6QJC2lequ7yxtE6vOoKyUAvbAstLaXVrX16xx m+sesm6wT4CbTzeqsfGaOxAeCw2UqFfs34DZDZmuIhb+AcxglBJ7L3IQD w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: WhTd4SGrTlyoerr4iIgAVg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: k9B5vsF5RLKF7qsj6uSZxg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11682"; a="73183351" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,254,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="73183351" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Jan 2026 01:59:55 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: XFLH6wX1QCeVh2rWVMlKBw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: lTttj+paRWeICoj+PaAr/w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,254,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="212501718" Received: from smoticic-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.122]) by fmviesa004-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Jan 2026 01:59:46 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 11:59:43 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Wolfram Sang 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 =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= , 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-gpio@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: <20260125184654.17843-6-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 07:46:51PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > TLDR: I want to create a hwspinlock provider outside of the hwspinlock > directory. So, I refactored the headers into a provider/consumer pair. > Which seems to me like a reasonable seperation anyhow. No functional > changes. My build tests went fine and buildbots are happy, too. > > Longer explanation: > > There is a device (MFIS) in newer Renesas SoCs which combines various > things like hwspinlocks, mailboxes and other stuff. Sadly, these are not > strictly separated. Registers are kind of mixed and its register > unprotection scheme will need one of its own locks. I tried various > paths to handle this device (MFD, auxiliary bus) but I concluded that > the sub-device dependencies give enough reasons for a single driver in > drivers/soc/. So, this series will allow me to instantiate a hwspinlock > provider from the other directory. > > Patches 1+2 do the actual refactoring with a fallback being in place. I > used '-B' with git-format-patch in this RFC, so the actual changes are > more visible when the headers are moved. > > Patch 3 converts all the users. There are not many. We could try to get > all the acks for this single patch. Or I can break it into single > patches and send them to subsystems. I don't mind. > > Patch 4 simply removes the fallback. > > Looking forward to comments on this approach. If the hwspinlock > maintainers like it as is, I would kindly propose to apply patches 1+2 > after 7.0-rc1 comes out. This might sound a bit hasty, but a) I want to > avoid chasing a moving target and b) this would remove one dependency of > the hwspinlock driver I originally intend to upstream, of course. > > I would take care of patches 3+4 as needed. > > A branch can be found here: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wsa/linux.git renesas/hwspinlock/refactor-includes > > Patches are based on linux-next as of 2026-01-21. > > Opinions? I don't like the idea of sharing internal stuff. Why would we need to have a struct hwspinlock to be visible? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko