From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (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 32DBB1EF0AD for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:23:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740061436; cv=none; b=A1a630KKNVv9a7Rz4saYcObaagTjC6+ZjyQefJMeWXdML+SsoYiLulshstaKtMJNhU9pJBQB+C2UQkqyseH/ytVS1lZhtY37+xw1sGF0kNd8fCNIkPSgLV1TYxtzHXZrq5lkpbrX8Bgky64AaRB7FiNcAHQ4hw+aipNrcChrhWw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740061436; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IHpc8BhNMYbBZ5QlEaSz5EEhUpja+WNT+3USyZNpVZs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fyh4JMjNimFThlbLk1MO9Q7U91cPkFHif21hATwZZ1hdmKWnufTJcXf20LWby0jBD80cg9Xs24Yg7ekQq1COZLExJ0aABcYIQVYc40Jax20UXDsfdzdz4uyklX3abDGJD4iWYpNszR6Hl4rSkggPC+5hJsXTrRShA6DrmrC+vbw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=UvnsksJo; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=XKQVbQh8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="UvnsksJo"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="XKQVbQh8" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1740061433; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=aHcTChppjqvuNzS7vFiu5kshNkViGqBVbLVaVldcc+o=; b=UvnsksJoB4TjGpY3z5g40o2vjDoF1ZtNWhqskzpuMdwZEW2lb2Rtbdh2qcqMp+VJNY+qgy R9LeS5iooE4u4qVhgINEYRkdqGkCtFT4MdAyZq8WahPbrye25qZ7NSQE6mtYEsP5WPuPYn GLx3e0uNDzUAKgxbJd27P6T7ed6bc64OvHYIbl4VMACBRgWw4kQiSlQcX1V8ZhbAEXq2QP NN2Tuqw0BlMF9ccCRmCrFS36/Ldumea/FZZS99C0vNBMiiU3l5dKAmdnic7IgY5uyW5oWI Wn2CFW4gY7YEZCI3DWg9M34H2ate105CCnH9ARnpRl7SwuYpz7u1xAU0w0FAMw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1740061433; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=aHcTChppjqvuNzS7vFiu5kshNkViGqBVbLVaVldcc+o=; b=XKQVbQh8MsSiDU0tsEcVdVj8pWPto7NoxHoFB6Z612cxCFwO7Gr5KTvsUvxO6FpZn/nQ7W 8Aahx0qp8dAotyBQ== To: Jiri Slaby Cc: maz@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/18] irqdomain: Rename _add functions to _add_*_of_node In-Reply-To: <14544066-73b8-42a0-a29a-2d21ef0aa459@kernel.org> References: <20250115085409.1629787-1-jirislaby@kernel.org> <20250115085409.1629787-10-jirislaby@kernel.org> <87wme3m4a9.ffs@tglx> <14544066-73b8-42a0-a29a-2d21ef0aa459@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 15:23:52 +0100 Message-ID: <875xl4itjb.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jiri! On Thu, Feb 20 2025 at 09:17, Jiri Slaby wrote: > sorry for the delay, I drowned in tty. I'm sorry for you :) > On 06. 02. 25, 17:22, tglx wrote: >> I'm not convinced that this _of_node() _fwnode() churn is actually >> valuable. I rather go and consolidate the code so that the core >> functions take a fwnode argument, i.e. >> >> - irq_domain_add_xxx(node, ...) >> + irq_domain_add_xxx(of_fwnode_handle(node), ....) >> >> It's not asked too much from the developer to use of_fwnode_handle() at >> the call site and the resulting treewide churn is pretty much the same >> as in any case all call sites need to be touched. > > OK, NP. I am only confused by your "I rather go". Does it mean you are > already on it? Or should I translate that as "I'd rather go", ie. /me > doing the work -- I expect this case and can indeed do the job. I just > don't want to duplicate the work. I meant to write "I'd" and was obviously expecting you doing this :) Thanks, tglx