Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] device property: Allow secondary lookup in fwnode_get_next_child_node()

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 12:02:57AM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 02:58:22PM +0100, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > When device_get_child_node_count() got split to the fwnode and device
> > respective APIs, the fwnode didn't inherit the ability to traverse over
> > the secondary fwnode. Hence any user, that switches from device to fwnode
> > API misses this feature. In particular, this was revealed by the commit
> > 1490cbb9dbfd ("device property: Split fwnode_get_child_node_count()")
> > that effectively broke the GPIO enumeration on Intel Galileo boards.
> > Fix this by moving the secondary lookup from device to fwnode API.
> > 
> > Note, in general no device_*() API should go into the depth of the fwnode
> > implementation.

Thanks for the review, my answers below.

...

> > +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode))
> > +		return NULL;
> 
> This test is already being done by fwnode_call_ptr_op() (via
> fwnode_has_op()) so I'd omit it here. That would probably be best put in
> another patch though. Up to you.

I would like to keep this as is for the matter of backporting.
With that done, I can clean up further.

...

> As the function becomes trivial, I'd move it to property.h.

Yes, but the same applies to many functions in the property.c. I don't want to
treat this specially:
- exceptionally for this function (what about the rest?)
- for the matters of backporting

...

TL;DR: I would like to move this patch forward as is. After that I will
consider cleaning up as suggested taking into account other places.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko