On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 12:43 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Saravana, > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 8:19 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:11 AM Geert Uytterhoeven > > <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 1:11 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The OF_POPULATED flag was set to let fw_devlink know that the device > > > > tree node will not have a struct device created for it. This information > > > > is used by fw_devlink to avoid deferring the probe of consumers of this > > > > device tree node. > > > > > > > > Let's use fwnode_dev_initialized() instead because it achieves the same > > > > effect without using OF specific flags. This allows more generic code to > > > > be written in driver core. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Thanks for your patch! > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/soc/renesas/rcar-sysc.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/renesas/rcar-sysc.c > > > > @@ -437,7 +437,7 @@ static int __init rcar_sysc_pd_init(void) > > > > > > > > error = of_genpd_add_provider_onecell(np, &domains->onecell_data); > > > > if (!error) > > > > - of_node_set_flag(np, OF_POPULATED); > > > > + fwnode_dev_initialized(&np->fwnode, true); > > > > > > As drivers/soc/renesas/rmobile-sysc.c is already using this method, > > > it should work fine. > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> > > > i.e. will queue in renesas-devel for v6.4. I hope you meant queue it up for 6.3 and not 6.4? > > > > Thanks! Does that mean I should drop this from this series? If two > > maintainers pick the same patch up, will it cause problems? I'm > > eventually expecting this series to be picked up by Greg into > > driver-core-next. > > Indeed. Patches for drivers/soc/renesas/ are supposed to go upstream > through the renesas-devel and soc trees. This patch has no dependencies > on anything else in the series (or vice versa), so there is no reason > to deviate from that, and possibly cause conflicts later. This series is supposed to fix a bunch of issues and I vaguely think the series depends on this patch to work correctly on some Renesas systems. You are my main renesas person, so it's probably some issue you hit. Is you pick it up outside of this series I need to keep asking folks to pick up two different patch threads. I don't have a strong opinion, just a FYI. If you can take this patch soon, I don't have any concerns. > BTW, I will convert to of_node_to_fwnode() while applying. Sounds good. -Saravana
