From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA9EC2BA2B for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:37:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82BD92083E for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:37:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726579AbgDIKhe (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:37:34 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:9083 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725972AbgDIKhe (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:37:34 -0400 IronPort-SDR: iqOsvdaQJl7VAk9gxu0dg0luUqSQ7uWKnNNvYCx8dWTR1ytljOIwwTrrLAy7lcQpfEriAFFHxj qfvlSOOl6FpQ== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Apr 2020 03:37:34 -0700 IronPort-SDR: H2v7SCPRjshIjFhVJeWWAL+reHV9XQhwhwx4Hi1abW6oN+ZcNO+THyLwOh254FuXmaHUlZbRxt oH2EeH318vHg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.72,362,1580803200"; d="scan'208";a="251854220" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.40]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Apr 2020 03:37:32 -0700 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1jMUYx-00GvqW-Ip; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 13:37:35 +0300 Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:37:35 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Max Staudt , Heikki Krogerus Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] i2c: icy: Don't use software node when it's an overkill Message-ID: <20200409103735.GV3676135@smile.fi.intel.com> References: <20200408165247.13116-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <5867ca8b-215e-5ccf-bee9-feefc2e507c8@enpas.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5867ca8b-215e-5ccf-bee9-feefc2e507c8@enpas.org> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Sender: linux-i2c-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:24:20PM +0200, Max Staudt wrote: > Thank you, that looks much nicer indeed. I have also tested it on my Amiga just to be sure - it works. Thank you. > However, no signature yet because the call stack is giving me a headache: > > icy_probe() > -> i2c_new_scanned_device() > -> i2c_new_client_device() > -> device_add_properties() > > And here we are in drivers/base/property.c looking at device_add_properties(): > > * WARNING: The callers should not use this function if it is known that there > * is no real firmware node associated with @dev! In that case the callers > * should create a software node and assign it to @dev directly. > > > Why is this warning there? It flies right in the face of what we're trying to achieve here. > > It was introduced in 2018 with commit caf35cd52242 . > > > So either the warning is superfluous, or i2c_new_client_device() should be creating a software fwnode, I guess? No and no. First one because the mechanism is added to have quirks, it must not replace the actual possibility to provide this via firmware (DT / ACPI). Second one, because software node API should have (has?) the same warning. +Cc Heikki. Heikki, am I correct? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko