Re: [net-next PATCH v4 09/15] device property: Introduce fwnode_get_id()
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-01-22 18:44:15
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-arm-kernel, lkml
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-01-22 18:44:15
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 7:11 PM Rafael J. Wysocki [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 6:12 PM Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:40:41PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:quoted
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 4:46 PM Calvin Johnson [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Using fwnode_get_id(), get the reg property value for DT node or get the _ADR object value for ACPI node.So I'm not really sure if this is going to be generically useful. First of all, the meaning of the _ADR return value is specific to a given bus type (e.g. the PCI encoding of it is different from the I2C encoding of it) and it just happens to be matching the definition of the "reg" property for this particular binding.quoted
IOW, not everyone may expect the "reg" property and the _ADR return value to have the same encoding and belong to the same set of values,I have counted three or even four attempts to open code exact this scenario in the past couple of years. And I have no idea where to put a common base for them so they will not duplicate this in each case.In that case it makes sense to have it in the core, but calling the _ADR return value an "id" generically is a stretch to put it lightly. It may be better to call the function something like fwnode_get_local_bus_id()
Or fwnode_get_local_address() for that matter.