On 4/14/2016 3:02 AM, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > Hi Mark, > >> On Apr 14, 2016, at 12:59 , Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 09:48:49AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 04:47:57PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >>>> Hi experts. >>>> >>>> My understanding of refcount of DT node is poor. >>> >>> The message from DT people is... don't worry about DT node refcounting. >>> Do whatever you want with it, they don't care whether you have correct >>> refcounting or not. >>> >>> The background behind that is that I've tried to fix the refcounting, >>> and even had the coccinelle people generate some stuff to work on this >>> issue, but DT people's attitude towards it is "don't bother". >>> >>> So yes, people may get it wrong, but it seems it's something that DT >>> people want ignored. >> >> I'm not sure that's quite fair; the last discussion I recall about this >> ended up concluding that we need a better API, rather than papering over >> problems. >> >> That said, there isn't much obvious progress on that front. >> >> Frank, Pantelis, Rob, were there any conclusions on this from ELC, or is >> this something that needs someone to propose something? >> > > Frank mentioned that he wants a new API. I have some ideas about it too. > > My take is that drivers should never do reference counting, we have to figure > out a way for DT access using copy semantics or locks. > > References would still be required for core DT code, but that’s a sane subset. Yes. Nothing concrete about implementation was decided at ELC, but this issue is on my todo list. -Frank > >> Mark. >> >> [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree/153777 > > Regards > > — Pantelis > > . > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
