From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (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 84AE6192B89; Mon, 7 Apr 2025 12:23:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744028610; cv=none; b=PVE5CLzCeRKfVfOeNam8r7zVZ1bJ2et16s3z2Mt1HLSW06sGRptJ0BcUkIjU+th6OCCKlZnb/xRsexCdNsX/FDbCzimaDmTzu/Mgr2GToUbJV/3XIJmmJCnRQ1b2itbFCi0m4UGuvJfsdnqyGntdu2A7VBjWpO6HW4f1sIabZ/M= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744028610; c=relaxed/simple; bh=grRP9IIZu+yzVT4nTI/ur2s0/bB6KpDJMElRNUUlS7k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=pYvyGp1KxzMUsPV9GdUc+O/pTk2UJru5777ZTsv++ZoVG2gKoTsviVhLxEVjpQ9houiYj5/5QAuZfBQxYwpc6uNnOdEMvNcdtFsrKvFC1eg8VXlUi1kaRzz5exijEraa/Hq3a3P8l05uZDQsrslcHIbec9qD/nL7AY1hvSrg5Qw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=Eesl5/zA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Eesl5/zA" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1744028608; x=1775564608; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=grRP9IIZu+yzVT4nTI/ur2s0/bB6KpDJMElRNUUlS7k=; b=Eesl5/zANuz024Lx2kvJhiepAKftOk/C2I7sPNdaxHd+NEXH198xUmb2 aQG9C4tG9ipcZHanOhI74tR10aKP8IzHZgaixV/2QNoGZpqrY8tmxs0t+ 76Cveu+p8Aa/O5MREq8a/HSYx8T+U+7lM+HTYlY50WVl9uVctmzipLcBi 95FHCSCMZU7iRkq3RPDsCotl0hXqRKLMb/9pE5vxE7h6X/u4KAMUueF/e 7xc8U49fghRlVf0vfFgwnPpH9xy9Kf1LOSIMzaS+E1XEdprrTjQeSrM4k 6/aNGlNchnUpuI8os7aounWgZCJ6ZxgnZn/IrN66GGBtGXnpXNboXStyH w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5HxFY114QOeWVt2+BqMU0A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: eo423dVsQzqy2TUZCt39qA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11397"; a="44554989" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,194,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="44554989" Received: from orviesa008.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.148]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Apr 2025 05:23:26 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: r9NFi8VXRgyZc6Z/TpGkLg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +vw++kUxSJO/fOiJNdXVAQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,194,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="128875979" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.58]) by orviesa008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Apr 2025 05:23:26 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u1lVa-0000000A3zK-2mje; Mon, 07 Apr 2025 15:23:22 +0300 Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 15:23:22 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Tomi Valkeinen Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] i2c: core: Move client towards fwnode Message-ID: References: <20250407095852.215809-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 02:34:48PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 07/04/2025 12:55, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > The struct i2c_board_info has of_node and fwnode members. This is > > quite confusing as they are of the same semantics and it's tend > > to have an issue if user assigns both. Luckily there is only a > > single driver that does this and fix was sent today. Nevertheless > > the series moves the client handling code to use fwnode and deprecates > > the of_node member in the respective documentation. > > > > Tomi, can you test this series + the patch we discussed earlier so it works as > > expected? > > I tested this series, and then tested this series + "[PATCH v1 1/1] media: > i2c: ds90ub960: Remove of_node assignment". I didn't see anything amiss in > either case. > > Tested-by: Tomi Valkeinen Thank you very much for the testing! > I assume the ds90ub960 patch is the "single driver that does this and fix > was sent today"? If so, I think that patch could have been included in this > series as well, there's hardly a chance of conflicts with the one liner. And > if applied separately, we probably need to apply the ub960 patch one kernel > version later than this series. Yeah, I forgot to update the cover letter to point to that one out. I agree on everything you said above. But let's wait a bit for Wolfram to comment on / apply this first. It would be nice to have it in, so we prevent new ambiguous users from appearing. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko