From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.8]) (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 D5CF923A9A8; Tue, 10 Feb 2026 07:21:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.8 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770708065; cv=none; b=lLmp4RAPbktFU1PkAKUvdWDHkmdXdnwB5p7OHVOTCkholvMO1jcHwalVtv4UeTHa9Ry1uXBzeuo7kWb7G16AyL1ySPNNPI9riELIdGL+epWe2LpNO41t3+WibodPcSTgzIURPSGGhEmMTzqMakXE4NVbMUuVPf487/oS2ukHnUE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770708065; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OBZ7vmJOuXFVdEocUKywotsuTZKHpBEwnRySOMXd6l0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WdmFrjos1H8Hu0dZNjQJWkBak2zYUJR9bg03b7qqmtlWsvHt+/GCQxevGTPuM6EWA0sMn8zGPNPHWPGHQ1b4/DNhn5wqPdVZrJlUupudBaxYX/hCGyCCEOmit7OQX3+RPbEXjpGPCxBS2BHjgs5GxB1c/SKyBTR/tnJpHbkk944= 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=f/pLcOe3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.8 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="f/pLcOe3" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1770708064; x=1802244064; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=OBZ7vmJOuXFVdEocUKywotsuTZKHpBEwnRySOMXd6l0=; b=f/pLcOe3zsUaXu3GlMgtti46BxdIVBuVyjO6rwvbj+KWwD9xoSY10gI/ 96i01ZEnr7UH58ZBXG6jUXqPKTjAE/YNCC2un3z47QBbcX0VsnSHzVQKm hjf/CPMky5jmBuA3NCSC74MV7sKVck1ThykWAGKblXeaNrMjpCKOmTW+W Os+vGGnacqb96AG/hi5taHF1LpedpM8GrXz+8503nu2KbWTZArMomEWOF 1dSULFaTqfQ1yGlhyhJMv+XXmSE2pItH4LNuGxZpcScJIvq9pwAMcLqCu JcVdI8zBqf9KhU3lUzD9MlyUp+YRGfZeXN876Knd8QfHR8NHqaUr+KzUY g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: LOsoUTpiShqKuAbqy8dL4A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: iqt0ZsptRSOtDV/ILkzMTw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11696"; a="89414238" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,283,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="89414238" Received: from fmviesa002.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.142]) by fmvoesa102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2026 23:21:03 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: YtCzlq72TW+BC8VOT+lUBA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: rEiM7InjQtaVWLV1ZmJ1kg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,283,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="234791955" Received: from egrumbac-mobl6.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.39]) by fmviesa002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2026 23:20:55 -0800 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 09:20:52 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Baolin Wang , linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Torgue , Andy Shevchenko , Antonio Borneo , Arnd Bergmann , 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: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Mon, Feb 09, 2026 at 08:51:46PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Moving maintainers from CC to To ;) Do you, in general, approve this > > > change to the headers? > > > > Certainly, I don't think we should force unnatural slicing of drivers > > across the source tree. > > Cool, glad you like it. > > > I've always found the current model unergonomic, resolving this part > > might very well have the side effect that Andy is looking for (and I'd > > welcome that). > > Yeah probably, but frankly the task of redesigning hwlock-allocation is > a bit exceeding my bandwidth for this project. Can we make this a second > step on top of this series? How do you see it's done if others will (*) start (ab)using that struct directly? > And if so, would be this series acceptable > as-is then (modulo the better include-sorting mentioned by Andy)? *From my experience it's not the Q "will they or not?", the Q is "when?" they start abusing it. I really prefer to hide as much as possible from day 1. Maybe the structure can be split to two? Currently IIO has a (painful and long) conversion from open to opaque. Taking this into account I really don't won't to repeat this design mistake. But it's all up to the maintainers, of course. Just my deep worries about this... while the idea, as I said, I fully support. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko