On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 03:12:34PM +0100, Clément Léger wrote: > This series is part of a larger series which aims at adding fwnode > support in multiple subsystems [1]. The goal of this series was to > add support for software node in various subsystem but in a first > time only the fwnode support had gained consensus and will be added > to multiple subsystems. The goal is describing a solution. What is the problem? What's the scenario where you have a reset provider not described by firmware providing resets to devices (consumers) also not described by firmware. > For the moment ACPI node support is excluded from the fwnode support > to avoid creating an unspecified ACPI reset device description. With > these modifications, both driver that uses the fwnode_ API or the of_ > API to register the reset controller will be usable by consumer > whatever the type of node that is used. Good, because controlling reset lines directly isn't how the ACPI device model works AFAIK. > One question raised by this series is that I'm not sure if all reset > drivers should be modified to use the new fwnode support or keep the > existing device-tree support. Maintainer advice on that particular > question will be welcome. That would be pointless churn IMO. Why do we need to convert drivers which the vast majority will never use anything but DT? Rob
