Re: [PATCH v21 08/13] mfd: core: Add firmware-node support to MFD cells

Lee Jones
2026-05-05T15:05:47Z

On Thu, 30 Apr 2026, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 6:10 PM Shivendra Pratap
> <shivendra.pratap@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 29-04-2026 15:20, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 11:46 AM Shivendra Pratap
> > > <shivendra.pratap@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If set, it would be called from MFD core and would do the name lookup
> > >>>> and return the fwnode which would then be assigned to the cell device?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Or should we just drop this patch for fwnode in mfd-core?
> > >>
> > >> Export a new call in reboot-mode framework as:
> > >> reboot_mode_register_node(struct reboot_mode_driver *reboot,
> > >> struct device_node *np / fwnode)
> > >>
> > >> Use the parent node in psci-reboot-mode and find reboot-mode and call
> > >> reboot_mode_register_node?
> > >>
> > >
> > > No, I think the reboot-mode device (as pointed to by the dev field of
> > > struct reboot_mode_driver) should be associated with the right fwnode
> > > from the start so it should be handled in MFD core.
> >
> > Ack. something like should be fine?
> >
> > drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c :
> > + if (!pdev->dev.fwnode && cell->get_fwnode) {
> > + fwnode = cell->get_fwnode(parent);
> > + if (fwnode)
> > + device_set_node(&pdev->dev, fwnode);
> > + }
> >
>
> Possibly we could find a better name, but yeah the general idea is sound.
>
> Of course, let's maybe here from Lee if he's ok before sending a new version.

Send away - I'll review in the context of the whole submission.

--
Lee Jones