Re: [PATCH 11/13] mfd: pm8008: rework driver

[Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:15:43PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:42 PM Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 10:18:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Mon, May 06, 2024 at 05:08:28PM +0200, Johan Hovold kirjoitti:

> > > > +static void devm_irq_domain_fwnode_release(void *res)
> > > > +{
> > >
> > > > +   struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = res;
> > >
> > > Unneeded line, can be
> > >
> > > static void devm_irq_domain_fwnode_release(void *fwnode)
> > >
> > > > +   irq_domain_free_fwnode(fwnode);
> > > > +}
> >
> > I think I prefer it this way for clarity and for type safety in the
> > unlikely even that the argument to irq_domain_free_fwnode() would ever
> > change.
> 
> If it ever changes, the allocation part most likely would need an
> update and since devm_add_action() takes this type of function, I
> don't believe the argument would ever change from void * to something
> else. With this it just adds an additional burden on the conversion.

I was referring to the irq_domain_free_fwnode() prototype.
 
> > > > +   name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "%pOF-internal", dev->of_node);
> > >
> > > You are using fwnode for IRQ domain and IRQ domain core uses fwnode, why OF here?
> > >
> > >       name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "%pfw-internal", dev_fwnode(dev));
> >
> > This driver only support OF so why bother.
> 
> Sure, but it makes a bit of inconsistency.

No, I don't consider this an inconsistency. Again, *this* is an OF
driver, other subsystems need to deal with ACPI and use fwnode.

Johan