Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] gpiolib: Fix a mess with the GPIO_* flags

[Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:45 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:07:58PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 4:05 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:22:09PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:44 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IIUC include/dt-bindings/ headers should only be used by DT sources
> > > > > and code that parses the OF properties.
> > > >
> > > > That's what I have come to understand as well.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if there is something that can be done to enforce it?
> > > >
> > > > Ideally the code that parses OF properties should have to
> > > > opt in to get access to the <dt-bindings/*> namespace.
> > >
> > > Whatever you, guys, come up with as a solution, can it be fixed sooner than later?
> > > I mean, I would appreciate if somebody got it done for v6.9-rcX/v6.10-rc1 so we don't
> > > need to look into this again.
> >
> > I'm not sure you got what I was saying. I don't think this can be
> > fixed quickly. This is just another bunch of technical debt that will
> > have to be addressed carefully on a case-by-case basis and run through
> > autobuilders in all possible configurations.
> >
> > This type of include-related issues is always brittle and will lead to
> > build failures if we don't consider our moves.
>
> I proposed a quick fix which was rejected. I think this is still doable in a
> few steps:
>

You having proposed a quick fix is not a reason for me to either apply
it immediately OR equally promptly provide a proper solution myself.

> - align constant values in DT and enum
> - drop usage of DT in the kernel code (That's what you want IIUC, however
>   I disagree with this from technical perspective as DT constants can be used
>   in the code as long as they are mapped 1:1 to what code does. That's current
>   state of affairs. OTOH semantically this may be an issue.)

It's against the convention of only using dt-bindings headers as I
described before. I disagree with your proposition and it seems to me
Linus backed me up on this.

> - restore enum usage treewide (?)
>
> Again, the problem now is only in open source / open drain configurations
> and there are only a few users of these flags _in kernel_. I do not see
> why it can not be done in one or two evenings time range.
>

So you know what needs doing. I'm at a conference now, I'll be off for
a week in April and I also have another conference scheduled for May.
If you believe this needs addressing urgently, then I suggest you do
it right. Otherwise, I'll get to it when I have the time.
Unfortunately my TODO list runneth over. :(

But I have to say, I suspect it won't be as easy as you present it
because we have so many build configs that may fail.

> P.S>
> Most of the time I spent when prepared the proposed fix is digging the history
> and trying to understand how comes that we have desynchronisation of the values
> over the time. The output of that is the list of Fixes tags.
>

Thank you, this history is useful and should make its way into git
history when we fix this issue.

Bart