From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753373AbcCaAzF (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:55:05 -0400
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.66]:65056 "EHLO
	szxga03-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750803AbcCaAzC (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:55:02 -0400
Reply-To: <qiujiang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] gpio: dwapb: convert device node to fwnode
References: <1458959496-57455-1-git-send-email-qiujiang@huawei.com>
 <1458959496-57455-2-git-send-email-qiujiang@huawei.com>
 <CANk1AXT5yHMwPJ7=0kSZKr+eHHdC1QXQVgstQ6QhFbUPSKuD+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHp75VcDAg_aXt7ej-_zXxHMXJohRM9ErQkJQS_ryekD-7V=zw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Alan Tull <delicious.quinoa@gmail.com>
CC: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        Jamie Iles <jamie@jamieiles.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linuxarm@huawei.com>, <haifeng.wei@huawei.com>,
        <charles.chenxin@huawei.com>, atull <atull@opensource.altera.com>
From: Jiang Qiu <qiujiang@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <56FC7491.5050000@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 08:51:29 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VcDAg_aXt7ej-_zXxHMXJohRM9ErQkJQS_ryekD-7V=zw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.74.160.152]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0),
	refid=str=0001.0A020205.56FC749E.0005,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0,
	ip=0.0.0.0,
	so=2013-05-26 15:14:31,
	dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: d1ec670b3f9a3c44f30ef2995081951d
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

在 2016/3/30 19:38, Andy Shevchenko 写道:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Alan Tull <delicious.quinoa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 9:31 PM, qiujiang <qiujiang@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>>> -               if (pp->idx == 0 &&
>>> -                   of_property_read_bool(port_np, "interrupt-controller")) {
>>> -                       pp->irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(port_np, 0);
>>> +               if (dev->of_node && pp->idx == 0 &&
>>> +                       fwnode_property_read_bool(fwnode,
>>> +                                                 "interrupt-controller")) {
>>> +                       pp->irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(to_of_node(fwnode), 0);
>>>                         if (!pp->irq) {
>>>                                 dev_warn(dev, "no irq for bank %s\n",
>>> -                                        port_np->full_name);
>>> +                                        to_of_node(fwnode)->full_name);
>>>                         }
>>>                 }
>>>
>>>                 pp->irq_shared  = false;
>>>                 pp->gpio_base   = -1;
>>> -               pp->name        = port_np->full_name;
>>> +               if (dev->of_node)
>>> +                       pp->name = to_of_node(fwnode)->full_name;
>>
>> Hi Jiang,
>>
>> I tested lightly on a CycloneV and it worked fine (with device tree).
>>
>> One suggestion for both patches: you could remove name from struct
>> dwapb_port_property and get rid of pp->name and nobody would miss it.
>> All it is used for is some dev_err's so the device info gets printed
>> anyway.  For example (if I leave the irq out of the DT)
>>
>> gpio-dwapb ff708000.gpio: no irq for bank /soc/gpio@ff708000/gpio-controller@0
>>
>> is redundant.  The only additional info here from the name is the port
>> index.  That could be added to the messages without having to get the
>> name through the two property/of methods.
>>
> 
> Good suggestion! That'll make patches and code cleaner.
> 
> Perhaps separate prepended  patch?
> 
Hi Alan/Andy,

It sounds good, I will follow this suggestion and do a test. But, what's the
"separate prepended patch" mean?

Thanks, Jiang