On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 04:49:50PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On 7/30/2019 1:52 PM, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 03:15:32PM +0200, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 03:07:15PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 12:52:58AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > It is helpful to know what device, if any, a software node is tied to, so > > > > > let's store a pointer to the device in software node structure. Note that > > > > > children software nodes will inherit their parent's device pointer, so we > > > > > do not have to traverse hierarchy to see what device the [sub]tree belongs > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > We will be using the device pointer to locate GPIO lookup tables for > > > > > devices with static properties. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/base/property.c | 1 + > > > > > drivers/base/swnode.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > > > include/linux/property.h | 5 +++++ > > > > > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/property.c b/drivers/base/property.c > > > > > index 348b37e64944..3bc93d4b35c4 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/base/property.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/base/property.c > > > > > @@ -527,6 +527,7 @@ int device_add_properties(struct device *dev, > > > > > if (IS_ERR(fwnode)) > > > > > return PTR_ERR(fwnode); > > > > > + software_node_link_device(fwnode, dev); > > > > > set_secondary_fwnode(dev, fwnode); > > > > > return 0; > > > > > } > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/swnode.c b/drivers/base/swnode.c > > > > > index 7fc5a18e02ad..fd12eea539b6 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/base/swnode.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/base/swnode.c > > > > > @@ -24,6 +24,9 @@ struct software_node { > > > > > /* properties */ > > > > > const struct property_entry *properties; > > > > > + > > > > > + /* device this node is associated with */ > > > > > + struct device *dev; > > > > > }; > > > > Let's not do that! The nodes can be, and in many cases are, associated > > > > with multiple devices. > > > They do? Where? I see that set of properties can be shared between > > > several devices, but when we instantiate SW node we create a new > > > instance for device. This is also how ACPI and OF properties work; they > > > not shared between devices (or, rather, the kernel creates distinct _and > > > single_ devices for instance of ACPI or OF node). I do not think we want > > > swnodes work differently from the other firmware nodes. > > Having multiple devices linked to a single node is quite normal. Most > > multifunctional devices will share a single node. The USB port devices > > will share their node (if they have one) with any device that is > > attached to them. Etc. > > > > If you want to check how this works with ACPI, then find > > "physical_node" named files from sysfs. The ACPI node folders in sysfs > > have symlinks named "physical_node<n>" for every device they are bind > > to. The first one is named just "physical_node", the second > > "physical_node1", the third "physical_node2", and so on. > > > > > > Every device is already linked with the software node kobject, so > > > > isn't it possible to simply walk trough those links in order to check > > > > the devices associated with the node? > > > No, we need to know the exact instance of a device, not a set of > > > devices, because even though some properties can be shared, others can > > > not. For example, even if 2 exactly same touch controllers in the system > > > have "reset-gpios" property, they won't be the same GPIO for the both of > > > them. > > I don't think I completely understand the use case you had in mind for > > this API, but since you planned to use it with the GPIO lookup tables, > > I'm going to assume it's not needed after all. Let's replace those > > with the references instead like I proposed in my reply to the 2/2 > > patch. > > > > Linking a single device with a node like that is in any case not > > acceptable nor possible. > > > I think I need to withdraw my ACK here at this point. OK, fair enough, I'll see if I can make the references that Heikki mentioned work for me. Thanks. -- Dmitry