Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] fw_devlink improvements

[Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 2:13 AM Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Saravana,
>
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 05:41:52PM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > Vladimir,
> >
> > Ccing you because DSA's and fw_devlink have known/existing problems
> > (still in my TODOs to fix). But I want to make sure this series doesn't
> > cause additional problems for DSA.
> >
> > All,
> >
> > This patch series improves fw_devlink in the following ways:
> >
> > 1. It no longer cares about a fwnode having a "compatible" property. It
> >    figures this out more dynamically. The only expectation is that
> >    fwnodes that are converted to devices actually get probed by a driver
> >    for the dependencies to be enforced correctly.
> >
> > 2. Finer grained dependency tracking. fw_devlink will now create device
> >    links from the consumer to the actual resource's device (if it has one,
> >    Eg: gpio_device) instead of the parent supplier device. This improves
> >    things like async suspend/resume ordering, potentially remove the need
> >    for frameworks to create device links, more parallelized async probing,
> >    and better sync_state() tracking.
> >
> > 3. Handle hardware/software quirks where a child firmware node gets
> >    populated as a device before its parent firmware node AND actually
> >    supplies a non-optional resource to the parent firmware node's
> >    device.
> >
> > 4. Way more robust at cycle handling (see patch for the insane cases).
> >
> > 5. Stops depending on OF_POPULATED to figure out some corner cases.
> >
> > 6. Simplifies the work that needs to be done by the firmware specific
> >    code.
> >
> > The v3 series has gone through my usual testing on my end and looks good
> > to me.
>
> Booted on an NXP LS1028A (arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a-rdb.dts)
> and a Turris MOX (arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-3720-turris-mox.dts)
> with no observed regressions.

Thanks for testing Vladimir!

> Is there something specific you would like
> me to test?


Not really, I just want to make sure the common DSA architectures
don't hit any regression. In the hardware you tested, are there cases
of PHYs where the supplier is the parent MDIO? I remember that being
the only case where I needed special casing
(FWNODE_FLAG_NEEDS_CHILD_BOUND_ON_ADD) in fw_devlink -- so it'll be
good to make sure I didn't accidentally break anything there.


-Saravana