On 25/02/2025 15:11, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 01:14:03PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
On 25/02/2025 01:21, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
This removes .of_node from 'struct power_supply', since there
is already a copy in .dev.of_node and there is no need to have
two copies.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/power/supply/power_supply_core.c | 17 ++++++++---------
include/linux/power_supply.h | 1 -
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/power_supply_core.c b/drivers/power/supply/power_supply_core.c
index d0bb52a7a0367a8e07787be211691cad14a41a54..11030035da6f121ca76bebf800c06cfd5db57578 100644
--- a/drivers/power/supply/power_supply_core.c
+++ b/drivers/power/supply/power_supply_core.c
@@ -200,11 +200,11 @@ static int __power_supply_populate_supplied_from(struct power_supply *epsy,
int i = 0;
do {
- np = of_parse_phandle(psy->of_node, "power-supplies", i++);
+ np = of_parse_phandle(psy->dev.of_node, "power-supplies", i++);
if (!np)
break;
- if (np == epsy->of_node) {
+ if (np == epsy->dev.of_node) {
dev_dbg(&psy->dev, "%s: Found supply : %s\n",
psy->desc->name, epsy->desc->name);
psy->supplied_from[i-1] = (char *)epsy->desc->name;
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ static int __power_supply_find_supply_from_node(struct power_supply *epsy,
struct device_node *np = data;
/* returning non-zero breaks out of power_supply_for_each_psy loop */
- if (epsy->of_node == np)
+ if (epsy->dev.of_node == np)
return 1;
return 0;
@@ -270,13 +270,13 @@ static int power_supply_check_supplies(struct power_supply *psy)
return 0;
/* No device node found, nothing to do */
- if (!psy->of_node)
+ if (!psy->dev.of_node)
return 0;
do {
int ret;
- np = of_parse_phandle(psy->of_node, "power-supplies", cnt++);
+ np = of_parse_phandle(psy->dev.of_node, "power-supplies", cnt++);
if (!np)
break;
@@ -606,8 +606,8 @@ int power_supply_get_battery_info(struct power_supply *psy,
const __be32 *list;
u32 min_max[2];
- if (psy->of_node) {
- battery_np = of_parse_phandle(psy->of_node, "monitored-battery", 0);
+ if (psy->dev.of_node) {
+ battery_np = of_parse_phandle(psy->dev.of_node, "monitored-battery", 0);
if (!battery_np)
return -ENODEV;
This reminded me of a change I once did to power_supply - but maybe never
got it further than RFC stage. Anyways, do you think it would be possible to
decouple the battery info and struct power_suppply (while at it)?
I believe that the chargers and especially fuel-gauges which are designed to
operate with different batteries (and which get battery details using static
battery nodes), would like to get the battery info _before_ registering the
power_supply (to avoid sending bogus values while operating on defaults,
before the battery info is read and before things are set accordingly).
I know this may be a bit much to ask, but I believe it'd be an improvement.
Other than that, looks good to me.
I was thinking about adding an init function to power_supply_desc,
which would be called directly before psy->initialized is set to
true in the power-supply registration phase. I think that would be
the right place to setup device registers based on battery-info data.
Hm. I suppose that would work.
But it's definitely not a thing for this series.
Fair enough. I thought that might be the case but decided to ask
anyways, because, AFAIR there were no real problems what comes to not
requiring the struct power_supply for reading the battery_info. But yes,
I can see why killing the of_nodes is a big enough series, even without
added complexity :)
Yours,
-- Matti
