Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] hwspinlock: refactor headers into public provider/consumer pair

Andy Shevchenko
2026-02-09T11:35:26Z

On Mon, Feb 09, 2026 at 12:14:52PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:

> > > > > Providers need it, especially the 'priv' member. Consumers won't see it.
> > > >
> > > > But can't we make it opaque?
> > > >
> > > > We may have getters and setters for the priv member...
> > >
> > > I think we could do that.
> > >
> > > Two drivers use the bank member, but only for the device
> > > (lock->bank->dev). That can probably be refactored away, I'd guess.
> >
> > I am willing to develop this series in the above direction. Before
> > though, I'd like to know from hwspinlock maintainers if they agree to
> > this refactoring in general.
>
> Moving maintainers from CC to To ;) Do you, in general, approve this
> change to the headers? I think it is more modern and e.g. the mailbox
> subsystem has a similar structure, a header for the client and a header
> for the controller. And do you also prefer an opaque 'priv' member?

I'm in To and I am fine with this change (but not sure if I'm anyhow
a maintainer in the matter of the series).

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko