Re: [PATCH 3/8] iommu/fsl: use platform_device_set_fwnode()
Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.driver-core,dev.linux.lists.imx,dev.linux.lists.iommu,dev.linux.lists.mfd,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-arm-msm,org.kernel.vger.linux-i2c,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm,org.kernel.vger.linux-sound,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMRc=MefqCMgVv-o5hWoRwS2iXPQNs5nH2qHiz55+ew162LfSA@mail.gmail.com> |
On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 14:58:27 +0200, Robin Murphy <[email protected]> said: > On 20/07/2026 10:24 am, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >> Prefer the higher-level platform_device_set_fwnode() over the >> OF-specific platform_device_set_of_node() for dynamically allocated >> platform devices. > > This is very much non-portable code specific to OF-only platforms, but > if the intention is to remove platform_device_set_of_node() again > already, then FWIW, > Providing platform_device_set_of_node() and using it was done to make the transision to expanding reference counting to all firmware nodes possible. I don't think we'll remove it just yet as it doesn't make sense to convert the code under drivers/of/ to using the fwnode variant. > Acked-by: Robin Murphy <[email protected]> > > (Although I'm slightly puzzled by the cover letter - AFAICS in -next, > platform_device_set_of_node() is itself very much a user of > platform_device_set_fwnode(), however in terms of symbol exports, > perhaps the former could now just be a static inline wrapper?) > Sure that can be done independently later. Bart