lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Oct]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: mfd-core: Honour Device Tree's request to disable a child-device
From
Date
On 19/10/2019 08:28, Lee Jones wrote:
> Good morning Robin,
>
> It's been a while. I hope that you are well.
>
> Thanks for taking an interest.
>
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2019, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 18/10/2019 13:26, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> Until now, MFD has assumed all child devices passed to it (via
>>> mfd_cells) are to be registered. It does not take into account
>>> requests from Device Tree and the like to disable child devices
>>> on a per-platform basis.
>>>
>>> Well now it does.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com>
>>> Reported-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c | 5 +++++
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c b/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c
>>> index eafdadd58e8b..24c139633524 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c
>>> @@ -182,6 +182,11 @@ static int mfd_add_device(struct device *parent, int id,
>>> if (parent->of_node && cell->of_compatible) {
>>> for_each_child_of_node(parent->of_node, np) {
>>> if (of_device_is_compatible(np, cell->of_compatible)) {
>>> + if (!of_device_is_available(np)) {
>>> + /* Ignore disabled devices error free */
>>> + ret = 0;
>>> + goto fail_alias;
>>> + }
>>
>> Is it possible for a device to have multiple children of the same type? If
>> so, it seems like this might not work as desired if, say, the first child
>> was disabled but subsequent ones weren't.
>>
>> It might make sense to use for_each_available_child_of_node() for the outer
>> loop, then check afterwards if anything was found.
>
> The subsystem in its current guise doesn't reliably support the
> situation you describe. We have no way to track which child nodes have
> been through this process previously, thus mfd-core will always choose
> the first child node with a matching compatible string.

Ah, OK, if that situation has never been expected to work properly then
the simple patch is probably fine.

> If you have any suggests in terms of adding support for multiple
> children with matching compatible strings, I'd be very receptive.

I know very little about the MFD layer and its users, so I wasn't sure
whether this 'multiple child instances' thing would ever actually be a
real concern (other than for "simple-mfd"s which apparently don't use
this mechanism anyway) - I was just considering the code from a pure DT
perspective.

Cheers,
Robin.

>>> pdev->dev.of_node = np;
>>> pdev->dev.fwnode = &np->fwnode;
>>> break;
>>>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-10-22 20:17    [W:0.048 / U:0.572 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site