| Message ID | 1413991587-11110-1-git-send-email-romain.perier@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
This is related to the following subject "[RFC v3 PATCH 1/5] of: Add standard property for poweroff capability" and depends on the corresponding patch. 2014-10-22 17:26 GMT+02:00 Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com>: > No longer use custom property to define poweroff capability, use the standard > DT property instead. > > Signed-off-by: Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c > index 7612d89..b8dca8a 100644 > --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c > +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c > @@ -423,8 +423,7 @@ static struct tps65910_board *tps65910_parse_dt(struct i2c_client *client, > > board_info->irq = client->irq; > board_info->irq_base = -1; > - board_info->pm_off = of_property_read_bool(np, > - "ti,system-power-controller"); > + board_info->pm_off = of_system_has_poweroff_source(np); > > return board_info; > } > -- > 1.9.1 >
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, PERIER Romain wrote: > This is related to the following subject "[RFC v3 PATCH 1/5] of: Add > standard property for poweroff capability" and depends on the > corresponding patch. Then it should be sent in the same patch-set. There's nothing I can do with this patch as is. > 2014-10-22 17:26 GMT+02:00 Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com>: > > No longer use custom property to define poweroff capability, use the standard > > DT property instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com> > > --- > > drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 3 +-- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c > > index 7612d89..b8dca8a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c > > @@ -423,8 +423,7 @@ static struct tps65910_board *tps65910_parse_dt(struct i2c_client *client, > > > > board_info->irq = client->irq; > > board_info->irq_base = -1; > > - board_info->pm_off = of_property_read_bool(np, > > - "ti,system-power-controller"); > > + board_info->pm_off = of_system_has_poweroff_source(np); > > > > return board_info; > > } > >
2014-10-22 17:50 GMT+02:00 Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, PERIER Romain wrote: > >> This is related to the following subject "[RFC v3 PATCH 1/5] of: Add >> standard property for poweroff capability" and depends on the >> corresponding patch. > > Then it should be sent in the same patch-set. > > There's nothing I can do with this patch as is. > Even if this patch is already commited and present in "linux-next" ? (or in Mark Brown's regulator tree) Romain
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 03:26:23PM +0000, Romain Perier wrote: > No longer use custom property to define poweroff capability, use the standard > DT property instead. > This breaks DT ABI stability right? An existing device tree using ti,system-power-controller won't work anymore after this patch right? I don't think that's acceptable. CHeers, Peter.
Hi Peter, 2014-10-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>: > This breaks DT ABI stability right? An existing device tree using ti,system-power-controller won't work anymore after this patch right? I don't think that's acceptable. > This is why I converted all dts which use "ti,system-power-controller" and tps65910/tps65911 to the new property (everything is in the patches serie). However, with an existing dtb it will no longer work, yes. What do you suggest ? keep these two properties in the driver ? :/ I mean, this is a standardization, so all the corresponding dts must be updated and rebuilt... Like when you change something in a dt-binding, you should update and rebuilt the dts... I Don't compute. Romain
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, PERIER Romain wrote: > 2014-10-22 17:50 GMT+02:00 Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>: > > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, PERIER Romain wrote: > > > >> This is related to the following subject "[RFC v3 PATCH 1/5] of: Add > >> standard property for poweroff capability" and depends on the > >> corresponding patch. > > > > Then it should be sent in the same patch-set. > > > > There's nothing I can do with this patch as is. > > > > Even if this patch is already commited and present in "linux-next" ? > (or in Mark Brown's regulator tree) Usually it wouldn't be possible to take this, as it would be difficult to ensure bisectability. The way we usually deal with this is to have a shared immutable branch between the effected subsystems, but we can only do this if the patches are sent as a set. However, it appears as though Mark has "of: Add standard property for poweroff capability" on a tagged branch on its own. This means, after checking with Mark that this branch in indeed stable, I can merge it in and base this commit on top of it. Not many people setup their repos like Mark does, so I guess you are lucky this time. Once I've heard back from Mark, I'll let you know when I apply the patch.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 6:39 PM, PERIER Romain <romain.perier@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > 2014-10-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>: >> This breaks DT ABI stability right? An existing device tree using ti,system-power-controller won't work anymore after this patch right? I don't think that's acceptable. >> > > This is why I converted all dts which use "ti,system-power-controller" > and tps65910/tps65911 to the new property (everything is in the > patches serie). However, with an existing dtb it will no longer work, > yes. > What do you suggest ? keep these two properties in the driver ? :/ > > I mean, this is a standardization, so all the corresponding dts must > be updated and rebuilt... Like when you change something in a > dt-binding, you should update and rebuilt the dts... I Don't compute. DT ABI stability rule: any DTB that worked with kernel x must also work with kernel x+1. It seems like this patch would break that rule. It's ok to manage new properties and to deprecate the use of older ones if it makes sense (and in this case it seems like it does). But the old property must still be handled for compatibility reasons.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:39:34AM +0200, PERIER Romain wrote: > Hi Peter, > > 2014-10-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>: > > This breaks DT ABI stability right? An existing device tree using ti,system-power-controller won't work anymore after this patch right? I don't think that's acceptable. > > > > This is why I converted all dts which use "ti,system-power-controller" > and tps65910/tps65911 to the new property (everything is in the > patches serie). However, with an existing dtb it will no longer work, > yes. > What do you suggest ? keep these two properties in the driver ? :/ > Yes. Existing DTs should work with new kernels. So there's no other choice than leaving support for the existing property in place. Obviously DTs for new boards can use the new standardized property. Cheers, Peter.
Okay, will do these changes. 2014-10-24 10:02 GMT+02:00 Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:39:34AM +0200, PERIER Romain wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> 2014-10-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>: >> > This breaks DT ABI stability right? An existing device tree using ti,system-power-controller won't work anymore after this patch right? I don't think that's acceptable. >> > >> >> This is why I converted all dts which use "ti,system-power-controller" >> and tps65910/tps65911 to the new property (everything is in the >> patches serie). However, with an existing dtb it will no longer work, >> yes. >> What do you suggest ? keep these two properties in the driver ? :/ >> > > Yes. Existing DTs should work with new kernels. So there's no other choice > than leaving support for the existing property in place. Obviously DTs for new > boards can use the new standardized property. > > Cheers, > > Peter.
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c index 7612d89..b8dca8a 100644 --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c @@ -423,8 +423,7 @@ static struct tps65910_board *tps65910_parse_dt(struct i2c_client *client, board_info->irq = client->irq; board_info->irq_base = -1; - board_info->pm_off = of_property_read_bool(np, - "ti,system-power-controller"); + board_info->pm_off = of_system_has_poweroff_source(np); return board_info; }
No longer use custom property to define poweroff capability, use the standard DT property instead. Signed-off-by: Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com> --- drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)