| Message ID | 20221121152704.30180-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/4] media: ipu3-cio2: Don't dereference fwnode handle | expand |
+ Cc: Petr, Sergey On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:27:01PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > Use acpi_fwnode_handle() instead of dereferencing an fwnode handle directly, > which is a better coding practice. It appears that this series depends on fd070e8ceb90 ("test_printf: Refactor fwnode_pointer() to make it more readable") which is in PRINTK tree. Sakari, Mauro, if you are okay to route this via that tree, can we get your tags for that? Otherwise we need to postpone this till v6.2-rc1 (but I would like to decrease the chances to appear a new user of the to be removed API).
Dunno what happened to my previous reply to this. Okay, trying again... + Cc: Petr, Sergey On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:27:01PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > Use acpi_fwnode_handle() instead of dereferencing an fwnode handle directly, > which is a better coding practice. It appears that this series depends on fd070e8ceb90 ("test_printf: Refactor fwnode_pointer() to make it more readable") which is in PRINTK tree. Sakari, Mauro, if you are okay to route this via that tree, can we get your tags for that? Otherwise we need to postpone this till v6.2-rc1 (but I would like to decrease the chances to appear a new user of the to be removed API). Note, that Greg Acked v1 of the swnode patches (which are the same in v2).
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 11:53:12AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 09:02:49AM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 09:10:58PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Dunno what happened to my previous reply to this. Okay, trying again... > > > > > > + Cc: Petr, Sergey > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:27:01PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > Use acpi_fwnode_handle() instead of dereferencing an fwnode handle directly, > > > > which is a better coding practice. > > > > > > It appears that this series depends on fd070e8ceb90 ("test_printf: Refactor > > > fwnode_pointer() to make it more readable") which is in PRINTK tree. > > > > > > Sakari, Mauro, if you are okay to route this via that tree, can we get your > > > tags for that? Otherwise we need to postpone this till v6.2-rc1 (but I would > > > like to decrease the chances to appear a new user of the to be removed API). > > > > > > Note, that Greg Acked v1 of the swnode patches (which are the same in v2). > > > > Sorry for the late reply. Feel free to do that if it's not too late, with: > > > > Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> I intended to add this applies to the set. > > Thank you! > I think it's a bit late for printk tree to consume this. If it's the case > (Petr?) then I will submit a new version after v6.2-rc1 is out. > > > I don't think the linkelihood for having a new user for this API is high.
On Wed 2022-12-07 11:53:12, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 09:02:49AM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 09:10:58PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Dunno what happened to my previous reply to this. Okay, trying again... > > > > > > + Cc: Petr, Sergey > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:27:01PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > Use acpi_fwnode_handle() instead of dereferencing an fwnode handle directly, > > > > which is a better coding practice. > > > > > > It appears that this series depends on fd070e8ceb90 ("test_printf: Refactor > > > fwnode_pointer() to make it more readable") which is in PRINTK tree. > > > > > > Sakari, Mauro, if you are okay to route this via that tree, can we get your > > > tags for that? Otherwise we need to postpone this till v6.2-rc1 (but I would > > > like to decrease the chances to appear a new user of the to be removed API). > > > > > > Note, that Greg Acked v1 of the swnode patches (which are the same in v2). > > > > Sorry for the late reply. Feel free to do that if it's not too late, with: > > > > Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> > > Thank you! > I think it's a bit late for printk tree to consume this. If it's the case > (Petr?) then I will submit a new version after v6.2-rc1 is out. Yes, I am sorry but it is too late for the printk tree. I am going to send the pull request for 6.2 today or tomorrow. Linus explicitly asked to send the pull request early this time because the merge window will be overlapping with the holidays. On the positive side. There is a high chance that the changes from the printk tree will be in the mainline early enough so that you could manage to send this still during the merge window. Best Regards, Petr
diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/cio2-bridge.c b/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/cio2-bridge.c index df6c94da2f6a..18974a72e94a 100644 --- a/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/cio2-bridge.c +++ b/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/cio2-bridge.c @@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ static int cio2_bridge_connect_sensor(const struct cio2_sensor_config *cfg, struct cio2_bridge *bridge, struct pci_dev *cio2) { - struct fwnode_handle *fwnode; + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, *primary; struct cio2_sensor *sensor; struct acpi_device *adev; acpi_status status; @@ -322,7 +322,9 @@ static int cio2_bridge_connect_sensor(const struct cio2_sensor_config *cfg, } sensor->adev = acpi_dev_get(adev); - adev->fwnode.secondary = fwnode; + + primary = acpi_fwnode_handle(adev); + primary->secondary = fwnode; cio2_bridge_instantiate_vcm_i2c_client(sensor);