From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (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 AB6AB1BDEE; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:13:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708679621; cv=none; b=d0NmrjgqdlhKN8itCy+ve6/EOmss2rH6NnlM0dhMIka8u1ta44peIdSKQ34uNxNx26uZ2u/TpgzjoAYMAGVMAPv9i6qGiZn2wttOfkKQImOoXYGrEIQANgciHj6o0j0U/clop1hy3An1Q2oaJZ3zARuY1mTPMYXXsG//TaDuX8Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708679621; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/cxpcMGeXQCVeZ+jggIPGGTTs4Sl/gpFjVZN1g4uHzo=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=bII2iLj72jKaIfQATaFa8UU8COt1ba9GoIPk5HbTjwkF/R+UmyYKiKG0nfGuWRCxBNvQF1hFUiWEHjzNwazkb9YsGMA+sVDdAC5k0az0iIZGlFosnO9I2kNt8CRO9XvVWUus+2WHubv9Vl9/aim16lIBm+HSn9Q2NyZbJ9u5j8k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.31]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Th42G63N9z6JBbR; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 17:09:10 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5CF81400DC; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 17:13:35 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.202.227.76) by lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:13:35 +0000 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:13:34 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Andy Shevchenko CC: Jonathan Cameron , , "Rob Herring" , Frank Rowand , , Julia Lawall , "Peter Zijlstra" , Nicolas Palix , Sumera Priyadarsini , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Nuno =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] of: automate of_node_put() - new approach to loops. Message-ID: <20240223091334.00005522@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20240211174237.182947-1-jic23@kernel.org> <20240216144756.08e25894@jic23-huawei> Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml500002.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.78) To lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 17:25:45 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 02:47:56PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 14:03:29 +0200 > > Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 05:42:28PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > ... > > > > I'm a bit skeptical about need of this work. What I would prefer to see > > > is getting rid of OF-centric drivers in IIO. With that, we would need > > > only fwnode part to be properly implemented. > > > > To be honest main reason for doing of first was that they have unit tests :) > > fwnode also has KUnit test. Have you considered adding test cases there? > > > The IIO drivers were more of a proving ground than cases I really cared > > out cleaning up. However I'm always of the view that better to make > > some improvement now than wait for a perfect improvement later. > > Yes, but in my opinion _in this particular case_ it brings more churn and > some maybe even not good from educational purposes, i.e. one can look at > the current series and think "oh, OF is still in use, let me provide my > driver OF-only (for whatever reasons behind)", while targeting conversion > first will tell people: "hey, there is an agnostic device property framework > that should be used in a new code and that's why we have been converting old > drivers too". > > > However one or two are not going to be converted to fwnode handling > > any time soon because they make use of phandle based referencing for > > driver specific hook ups that isn't going to get generic handling any > > time soon. > > Sure, exceptions happen. After the series converting over most of the cases this patch set touched in IIO, I have rcar-gyroadc and the unit test left, which are enough to show the purpose of the patch and put a few real users in place. Will submit a v2 with just those 2 users. Ideal would be to get these in for the merge window so it is available for other subsystems next cycle. > > > I'll probably focus on getting the fwnode version of this moving > > forwards first though and 'maybe' convert a few of the easier ones > > of these over to that framework to reduce how many users of this > > we end up with in IIO. > > Thanks! >